User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (BeOS; U; Haiku BePC; en-US; rv:1.8.1.14) Gecko/20080429 BonEcho/2.0.0.14
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
Browscap
6014
vendor/browscap/browscap/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-900.php
Firefox 2.0Gecko 1.8BeOS unknownunknowngeneral DesktopDesktop0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Firefox 2.0Gecko 1.8BeOS Desktop0.017 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Firefox 2.0closeBeOS closecloseDesktopclose0.023 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla 1.8.1.14close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Firefox (BonEcho) 2.0.0.14closeHaiku OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.20401 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Firefox BonEcho (2.0Gecko Haiku OS desktop0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 1.8closeBeOS closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Bon Echo 2.0.0close closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 5.0Gecko 1.8.1.14closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15401 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

BonEcho 2.0.0.14closeHaiku closecloseclosecloseclose0.062 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mozilla 1.8.1.14Gecko 20080429BeOS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24101 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Firefox BonEcho 2.0.0.14Gecko 1.8.1Haiku desktopcloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
BonEcho 2.0.0.14closeBeOS 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 07:58:43 | by ThaDafinser