User agent detail

AIRNESS-AIR99/REV 2.2.1/Teleca Q03B1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
vendor/piwik/device-detector/Tests/fixtures/feature_phone.yml
Obigo AirnessAIR99feature phonecloseclose0 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/browser-obigo.yaml
Obigo Q 3B AIR99mobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
AIRNESS-AIR99 REVcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo Q 3close AirnessAIR99mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20401 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo AirnessAIR99feature phoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo close closecloseclosecloseclose0.058 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

No result found
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 3B AirnessAIR99mobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close AirnessAir99Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.024 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca Q03B1close 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 07:58:59 | by ThaDafinser