User agent detail

PPC; 240x320; HTC_WIZARD/1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC)/UC Browser7.7.1.88
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCWIZARD Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 7.7WebKit Android Mobile Phoneyesyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 4.01closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.19202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.7 Windows CE HTCWIZARDsmartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.7.1closeWindows CE HTCWIZARDcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.07801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.7.1.88 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.7Gecko Windows Mobile HTCWizardmobile:smartyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile HTCWizard/ProdigyFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.017 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 13:33:32 | by ThaDafinser