User agent detail

MOT-v200./10.01 UP/4.1.21b UP.Browser/4.1.21b-XXXX
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
Motorolav200 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Openwave Mobile Browser 4.1 Mobile Phoneyes0.095 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-v200 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Openwave Mobile Browser 4.1.21bclose MotorolaV200mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Openwave Mobile Browser 4.1 Motorolav200.smartphoneyes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
UP.Browser 4.1.21close Motorolav200closeclosecloseclose0.044 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini 4.1.21b MotorolaMotorola v200closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.43704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Openwave 4.1 Motorolav200mobile:featureyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close MotorolaV200Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.04 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 13:36:04 | by ThaDafinser