User agent detail

Mozilla/3.0 (WILLCOM;KYOCERA/W320K/2;1.0.7.14.000000/0.1/C100) Opera/7.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/carrier-willcom.yaml
Opera Mobile 7.0 W320Kmobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
Opera 7.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Opera close closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Opera Mobile 7.0close KyoceraW320Kmobile-browseryescloseclose0.20201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Opera 7.0Presto KyoceraW320Ksmartphoneyes0.002 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Opera 7.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 7.0close closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

Opera 7.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.069 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Opera 7.0 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24301 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Opera Mobile 7.0 KyoceraW320Kmobile:featureyescloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera W320Kcloseclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close Desktopcloseclose0.019 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Opera 7.0close closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail

About this comparison

The primary goal of this project is simple
I wanted to know which user agent parser is the most accurate in each part - device detection, bot detection and so on...

The secondary goal is to provide a source for all user agent parsers to improve their detection based on this results.

You can also improve this further, by suggesting ideas at ThaDafinser/UserAgentParserComparison

The comparison is based on the abstraction by ThaDafinser/UserAgentParser
Comparison created 2016-05-10 07:56:58 | by ThaDafinser