User agent detail

DoCoMo/2.0 N2102V(c100;TB)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close DoCoMoN2102Vclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/carrier-docomo.yaml
N2102Vmobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
i-mode Browser 2.0 JAVA Mobile Deviceyes0.008 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
i-mode Browser 2.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Deviceyesclose0.011 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
DoCoMo 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom

NetFront close DoCoMoN2102Vmobile-browseryescloseclose0.19601 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
DoCoMoN2102Vfeature phoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close DoCoMoN2102Vcloseclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.16701 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

N2102Vcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23601 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
NECN2102Vmobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
docomo N2102Vcloseclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close DoCoMoN2102VFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.02 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
DoCoMo 2.0close 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 08:02:11 | by ThaDafinser