User agent detail

Docomo/2.0 P2002(c100)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/carrier-docomo.yaml
P2002mobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
DoCoMo 2.0 JAVA Mobile Deviceyes0.005 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
DoCoMo 2.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Deviceyesclose0.011 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
Docomo 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom

NetFront close P2002mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20301 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
DoCoMoP2002feature phoneyes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15101 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

P2002closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.25501 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
P2002mobile:featureyescloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.016 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
DoCoMo 2.0close 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 08:04:15 | by ThaDafinser