User agent detail

HTC_Universal/WM6.5/WAP1.2 Profile/MIDP2.0 Configuration/CLDC1.0 Mozilla/4.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC)/UCWEB7.0.0.33/31/999
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCUniversal Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeWindows GenericWindows Mobilemobile-browseryescloseclose0.29103 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.0 Windows CE HTCUniversalsmartphoneyes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.0.0closeWindows CE HTCUniversalcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 7.0.0.33closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.05901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.0.0.33 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.51505 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.0Gecko Windows CE HTCUniversalmobile:featureyescloseclose0.018 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.013 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 13:27:15 | by ThaDafinser