User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) T-Mobile_Cleopatra
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/smartphone-3.yml
IE Mobile 7.11Windows CE Trident T-MobileCleopatrasmartphone Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IEMobile 7.11Trident 3.1WinCE Mobile Phoneyes0.019 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
IEMobile 7.11closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE Mobile 7.11closeWindows T-MobileShadow II / Cleopatramobile-browseryescloseclose0.18 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
IE Mobile 7.11Trident Windows CE T-MobileCleopatrasmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE Mobile 7.11closeWindows CE closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
IE Mobile 7.11closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.061 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer Mobile Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.407 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0 Windows Mobile 6.1T-MobileShadow IImobile:smartyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile T-MobileShadow II / CleopatraFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.02 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 2016-02-13 13:25:04 | by ThaDafinser