User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; archive.org_bot; Wayback Machine Live Record; +http://archive.org/details/archive.org_bot)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
vendor/piwik/device-detector/Tests/fixtures/bots.yml
closecloseyesarchive.org botCrawler0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
yesInternet ArchiveBot/Crawler0.018 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
close closecloseyesInternet Archiveclose0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

close closeyesArchive.orgclose0.23001 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
yesarchive.org botCrawler0.001 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
close closeclosecloseyesarchive.org_botclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mozilla 5.0 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23601 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
closeyesArchive.orgclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closecloseclosecloseclosecloseyesclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close yescloseclose0.017 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
closeMacintosh 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 08:07:20 | by ThaDafinser