User agent detail

LG-MS25 IEMobile/WAP2.0 MIDP-2.0/CLDC-1.1 (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
LGMS25 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 7.7WebKit Android Mobile Phoneyesyes0.025 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
IEMobile WAP2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE Mobile 4.01closeWindows GenericWindows Mobilemobile-browseryescloseclose0.19308 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.7 Windows CE LGMS25smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.7.1closeWindows CE LGMS25closeclosecloseclose0.013 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
IE Mobile closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.21809 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.7.1.88 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40916 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.7Gecko Windows Mobile LGMS25mobile:smartyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.015 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 13:35:32 | by ThaDafinser