head to head · open source

quasar vs random-user-agent

quasar has 27,211 GitHub stars, 3,672 forks, 74 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. random-user-agent has 759 stars, 81 forks, 30 open issues and last shipped 6 days ago. quasar leads on adoption by 3,485% (27,211 vs 759 stars). quasar is written in JavaScript under MIT; random-user-agent is written in TypeScript under MIT. quasar has attracted 13% as many forks as stars, random-user-agent 11%. quasar was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (browser-extension), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

quasar ★ 27K random-user-agent ★ 759 category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

quasar random-user-agent
GitHub stars ★ 27K ★ 759
License MIT MIT
Written in JavaScript TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-14
Forks ⑂ 3.7K ⑂ 81
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick quasar if

  • You weight community size — 27K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches JavaScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full quasar profile →

pick random-user-agent if

  • You want the random-user-agent feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You evaluated both and random-user-agent fits your workflow better

full random-user-agent profile →

About quasar

Quasar Framework is an MIT licensed Vue.js framework that builds responsive single page apps, server side rendered and statically generated sites, progressive web apps, browser extensions, hybrid mobile apps, and Electron desktop apps from a single codebase.

read the full quasar overview →

About random-user-agent

Random User Agent is a free, MIT licensed TypeScript browser extension for Chrome, Firefox, Edge, and Opera that automatically replaces the browser's User Agent identifier with a randomized one, intended for individuals who want a different fingerprint without configuring anything by hand.

read the full random-user-agent overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 205K Excalidraw ★ 132K RustDesk ★ 124K LocalSend ★ 92K AppFlowy ★ 77K OBS Studio ★ 76K

Related comparisons

vscode vs monaco-editor browser-use vs chrome-devtools-mcp playwright vs chrome-devtools-mcp puppeteer vs chrome-devtools-mcp ublock vs ladybird playwright vs obscura ublock vs chrome-devtools-mcp ladybird vs chrome-devtools-mcp openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More Browsers & Extensions projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Browsers & Extensions field.

quasar vs uBlock quasar vs Ladybird quasar vs chrome-devtools-mcp quasar vs monaco-editor quasar vs Zen Browser quasar vs servo quasar vs serenity quasar vs refined-github quasar vs slate quasar vs Avalonia quasar vs webtorrent quasar vs fingerprintjs

Frequently asked questions

Is quasar or random-user-agent more popular?

quasar has 27,211 GitHub stars and random-user-agent has 759. quasar has the larger community by that measure.

Are quasar and random-user-agent free?

Both are open source. quasar is licensed under MIT and random-user-agent under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between quasar and random-user-agent?

quasar is written in JavaScript and random-user-agent in TypeScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, quasar or random-user-agent?

Choose quasar if you want the larger community (27,211 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose random-user-agent if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.