User agent detail

HTC_Touch_Diamond2_T5353 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC)/UC Browser7.7.1.88/31/400
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCTouch_Diamond2_T5353 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 7.7WebKit Android Mobile Phoneyesyes0.05201 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 4.01closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.20902 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.7 Windows CE HTCTouch Diamond2 T5353smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.7.1closeWindows CE HTCTouch_Diamond2_T5353closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.05801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.7.1.88 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40604 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.7Gecko Windows Mobile HTCTouch Diamond 2mobile:smartyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile HTCT5353Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.014 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 13:27:28 | by ThaDafinser