User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0(miniGUI/3.x; U; Linux i686; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.26 (KHTML, like Gecko) mDolphin/3.0 chrome/10.0 Safria/534.26
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_ua.yaml
mDolphin 3.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
Chrome 10.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Chrome 10.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Chrome 10.0closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.21201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Chrome 10.0WebKit GNU/Linux desktop0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Chrome 10.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
mDolphin 3.0closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Chrome 10.0WebKit 534.26closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15401 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Chrome 10.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.15301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Chrome 10.0WebKit 534.26Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23401 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Dolphin 3.0Webkit 534.26Linux mobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
Google Chrome 10.0closeGNU/Linux 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 08:08:15 | by ThaDafinser