User agent detail

HTC_Touch_Cruise_T4242 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC)/8.0.4.121/50/400
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCTouch_Cruise_T4242 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 4.01closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.18402 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 4.01Trident Windows CE HTCTouch Cruise T4242smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE 4.1closeWindows CE HTCTouch_Cruise_T4242closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.053 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer 4.1Trident Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Mobile Internet Explorer 4.0.1 Windows Mobile HTCTouch Cruisemobile:smartyescloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile HTCTouch CruiseFeature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.026 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 13:26:08 | by ThaDafinser