User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0.1) Gecko/20110831 conkeror/0.9.3
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
Browscap
6014
vendor/browscap/browscap/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-900.php
Conkeror 0.9Gecko unknownLinux unknownunknownLinux DesktopDesktop0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Conkeror 0.9Gecko Linux Desktop0.042 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Conkeror 0.9closeLinux closecloseDesktopclose0.03 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla 6.0.1closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Conkeror 0.9.3closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.20501 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Conkeror 0.9Gecko GNU/Linux desktop0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 6.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Conkeror 0.9.3closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 5.0Gecko 6.0.1closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15401 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Conkeror 0.9.3closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.083 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mozilla 6.0.1Gecko 20110831Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23801 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Conkeror 0.9.3Gecko 6.0.1Linux desktopcloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
Conkeror 0.9.3closeGNU/Linux 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 08:01:09 | by ThaDafinser