User agent detail

ICE Browser/5.05 (Java 1.4.0; Windows 2000 5.0 x86)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
yesBot/Crawler0.008 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
close closecloseyesclose0.013 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
ICE closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeWindows closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

ICE browser 5.05closeWindows 5.0desktop-browsercloseclose0.20701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Java Windows 2000desktop0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
ICE Browser 5.5closeWindows 2000 closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15201 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.071 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Windows Windows NT 5.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23201 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Windows 2000desktopcloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
closeWindows 2000closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 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 07:59:10 | by ThaDafinser