User agent strings.

Whatever happened to sane user agent definitions?

I was just browsing through my HTTP logs, and found this jewel:

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.4; Linux) KHTML/3.4.2 (like Gecko)
(Debian package 4:3.4.2-0ubuntu0hoary2)

In other words: I'm Mozilla 5.0 (or at least I pretend I am; at least I'm somewhat compatible. In reality, I'm Konqueror 3.4 running on Linux). My parsing engine is KHTML 3.4.2, but if you don't know that, it's somewhat similar to Gecko. I was packaged by Debian, but I actually mean Ubuntu Hoary. Might I make a suggestion?

Konqueror/3.4 (Linux) KHTML/3.4.2 (Ubuntu package

No, really. Otherwise, in ten years, we'll see stuff like...

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/5.0 (but actually Frobnidz/7.2))
FrobNidzHtml/7.2.1 (based on KHTML/4.2 (like Gecko) with patches from
FrobNidz Inc.) (Debian package 5:4.2.3-0ubuntu0wanky7 rebuilt for
Knoppix 5.0) (as implemented by Microsoft for Internet Explorer 8)

Or so. Which is silly.

Update: Yes, I know what the reason for those strings is, and why they are all built like that. I just happen to think it's incredibly silly to create a User Agent string that says you're based on foo, look like bar, and implement the same specs as frobnidz. And somewhere, hidden in a corner behind everything else, your real name. That this isn't going to change any time soon (because most web admins are braindead and/or don't know their job) is nothing new—but that doesn't make it less silly.

If anything, it calls for a different solution to the problems at hand. But then, I don't know what that solution would be, so let's just stick with laughing at how bad the current solution is, mm?