User agent detail

Spyglass_Mosaic/2.10 Win32 TGV/2
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/desktop/browser-mosaic.yaml
Spyglass Mosaic 2.10 Windows desktopclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
Spyglass closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom

Spyglass Mosaic 2.10closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.20701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Windows 95desktop0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
closeWindows 95 closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mosaic 2.10 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24201 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Spyglass Mosaic 2.10 Windows desktopcloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
Mosaic 2.10closeWindows 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 08:05:02 | by ThaDafinser