User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) USCCHTC6850
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
CellularHTC6850 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IEMobile 7.11Trident 3.1WinCE Mobile Phoneyes0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
IEMobile 7.11closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE Mobile 7.11closeWindows HTC6850mobile-browseryescloseclose0.197 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
IE Mobile 7.11Trident Windows CE yes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE Mobile 7.11closeWindows CE CellularHTC6850closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
IE Mobile 7.11closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.062 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer Mobile Windows HTCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.417 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0 Windows Mobile 6.1HTC6850mobile:smartyescloseclose0.018 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile HTC6850Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.03 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 13:36:37 | by ThaDafinser