User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; SLCC2;.NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; InfoPath.2) UCBrowser/8.6.0.199/84/352 UNTRUSTED/1.0 3gpp-gba

Detected by 8 of 8 providers
As bot detected by 0 of 7

GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeActions
BrowscapPhp
6011
IE 8.0Trident 4.0Win7 6.1Windows DesktopDesktop Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 8.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.1
UC Browser 8.6Trident Windows 7desktop Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 8.0closeWindows 7closecloseclosecloseclose Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.6.0closeWindows 7 closeclosecloseclose Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.9
UC Browser 8.6 mobile:featureyescloseclose Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 8.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close J2ME MidletFeature Phoneyescloseclose 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 2016-01-26 16:43:22 | by ThaDafinser