User agent detail

"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; Win 9x 4.90)"
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-295.php
yesFake IEBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesFake IEBot/Crawler0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 6.0closeWindows 4.90desktop-browsercloseclose0.212 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 6.0Trident Windows MEdesktop0.011 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows Meclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE 6.0closeWindows ME closeclosecloseclose0.015 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows Me closecloseclosecloseclose0.049 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer 6.0Trident Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.363 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Internet Explorer 6.0 Windows MEdesktopcloseclose0.017 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q05Aclose Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.01 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 13:27:36 | by ThaDafinser