User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.7) S11HT
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/carrier-emobile.yaml
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0Windows Mobile 6.1 HTCS11HTmobile:smartyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IEMobile 7.0Trident 3.1WinCE Mobile Phoneyes0.037 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
IEMobile 7.7closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE Mobile 7.7closeWindows EmobileS11HTmobile-browseryescloseclose0.19402 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
IE Mobile 7.7Trident Windows CE yes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE Mobile 7.7closeWindows CE closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
IE Mobile 7.7closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.08701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer Mobile Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42604 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0 Windows Mobile 6.1HTCEMONSTER S11HTmobile:smartyescloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile EmobileS11HTFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.13 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 13:36:09 | by ThaDafinser