User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; GENIX 4.1 MG-200/NS32332; en-US; rv:4.7.1.1) Gecko/20080815 SeaMonkey/1.2.3
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/desktop/os-unix.yaml
SeaMonkey 1.2.3Gecko 4.7.1GENIX 4.1desktopclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla 4.7.1.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

SeaMonkey 1.2.3close desktop-browsercloseclose0.20201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
SeaMonkey 1.2Gecko 0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
SeaMonkey 1.2.3close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
SeaMonkey 1.2.3close closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 5.0Gecko 4.7.1.1closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15101 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

SeaMonkey 1.2.3close closecloseclosecloseclose0.068 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Seamonkey 1.2.3Gecko 20080815a UNIX based OS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23801 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
SeaMonkey 1.2.3Gecko 4.7.1GENIX 4.1desktopcloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
SeaMonkey 1.2.3close closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.002 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 07:59:57 | by ThaDafinser