User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (BeOS; U; Haiku BePC; xx; rv:1.8.1.10pre) Gecko/20080112
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/desktop/os-haiku.yaml
Gecko 1.8.1Haiku desktopclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla 1.8.1.10preclose closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Mozilla rv:1.8.1.10closeHaiku OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.20601 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Haiku OS desktop0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 1.8closeBeOS closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 5.0Gecko 1.8.1.10closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15201 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Mozilla 1.8.1.10precloseHaiku closecloseclosecloseclose0.075 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mozilla 1.8.1.10preGecko 20080112BeOS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.25002 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Gecko 1.8.1Haiku desktopcloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
closeBeOS 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 08:05:17 | by ThaDafinser