User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (BeOS; U; Haiku BePC; xx; rv:1.8.1.18) Gecko/20081114 BonEcho/2.0.0.18
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/desktop/os-haiku.yaml
Firefox 2.0.0.18Gecko 1.8.1Haiku desktopclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Firefox 2.0Gecko 1.8BeOS Desktop0.06 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Firefox 2.0closeBeOS closecloseDesktopclose0.04 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla 1.8.1.18close closecloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Firefox (BonEcho) 2.0.0.18closeHaiku OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.21201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Firefox BonEcho (2.0Gecko Haiku OS desktop0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 1.8closeBeOS closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Bon Echo 2.0.0close closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 5.0Gecko 1.8.1.18closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15301 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

BonEcho 2.0.0.18closeHaiku closecloseclosecloseclose0.08 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mozilla 1.8.1.18Gecko 20081114BeOS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23101 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Firefox BonEcho 2.0.0.18Gecko 1.8.1Haiku desktopcloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
BonEcho 2.0.0.18closeBeOS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 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 07:57:01 | by ThaDafinser