User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (BeOS; U; Haiku BePC; en-US; rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080831 BonEcho/2.0.0.17
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
Browscap
6014
vendor/browscap/browscap/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-900.php
Firefox 2.0Gecko 1.8BeOS unknownunknowngeneral DesktopDesktop0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Firefox 2.0Gecko 1.8BeOS Desktop0.035 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Firefox 2.0closeBeOS closecloseDesktopclose0.023 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla 1.8.1.17close closecloseclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Firefox (BonEcho) 2.0.0.17closeHaiku OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.19801 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Firefox BonEcho (2.0Gecko Haiku OS desktop0.011 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 1.8closeBeOS closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Bon Echo 2.0.0close closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 5.0Gecko 1.8.1.17closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15501 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

BonEcho 2.0.0.17closeHaiku closecloseclosecloseclose0.078 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mozilla 1.8.1.17Gecko 20080831BeOS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40202 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Firefox BonEcho 2.0.0.17Gecko 1.8.1Haiku desktopcloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
BonEcho 2.0.0.17closeBeOS 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 08:06:00 | by ThaDafinser