User agent detail

DoCoMo/1.0/F671is/c1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/carrier-docomo.yaml
F671ismobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
DoCoMo 1.0 JAVA Mobile Deviceyes0.009 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
DoCoMo 1.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Deviceyesclose0.011 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
DoCoMo 1.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom

NetFront close DoCoMomobile-browseryescloseclose0.20301 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
DoCoMoF671isfeature phoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15101 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

F671iscloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23301 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
FujitsuF671ismobile:featureyescloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
docomo F671iscloseclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close DoCoMoF671iFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.021 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
DoCoMo 1.0close 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 08:05:37 | by ThaDafinser