User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 8.12; MSIEMobile 6.0) 480x800; XV6975; Windows Mobile 6.5 Professional;HTCXV 6975 Imagio Whitestone
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCXV 6975 Imagio Whitestone Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IEMobile 8.12Trident 3.1WinCE Mobile Phoneyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
IEMobile 8.12closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE Mobile 8.12closeWindows VerizonXV6875mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
IE Mobile 8.12Trident Windows CE HTCXVsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE Mobile 8.12closeWindows Mobile HTCXV 6975 Imagio Whitestonecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
IE Mobile 8.12closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.05301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer Mobile Windows HTCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40804 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0 Windows Mobile 6.5HTCTouch Diamond 2mobile:smartyescloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.014 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 13:31:23 | by ThaDafinser