User agent detail

Mozilla/4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5 i686)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
Browscap
6014
vendor/browscap/browscap/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-900.php
Netscape 4.51Gecko unknownLinux unknownunknownLinux DesktopDesktop0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Netscape 4.51Gecko Linux Desktop0.01 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Netscape 4.51closeLinux closecloseDesktopclose0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Netscape Communicator 4.5.1closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.20501 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
GNU/Linux desktop0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 4.51closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
closeLinux 2.2.5closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 4.51 closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.17001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Netscape Navigator 4.51 Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23401 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Netscape Communicator 4.5.1 Linux desktopcloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
closeGNU/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 08:01:29 | by ThaDafinser