User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC i-mate 6150/ 480x640)/UCWEB7.0.0.41/31/352
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
i-mate6150 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IEMobile 4.01Trident 3.1WinCE Mobile Phoneyes0.014 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeWindows GenericWindows Mobilemobile-browseryescloseclose0.19202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.0 Windows CE i-mate6150feature phoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.0.0closeWindows CE i-mate6150closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 7.0.0.41closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.06001 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.0.0.41 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.0Gecko Windows CE mobile:featureyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.09101 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 13:31:52 | by ThaDafinser