User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (MotorolaWebKit; U; /Windows CE 7.0) AppleWebKit/534.51 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/2.3.0 Mobile Safari/534.51
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/os-windowsce.yaml
Motorola WebKit Windows CE 7.0Webkit 534.51mobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 2.3.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Mobile Safari 2.3.0closeWindows 7.0GenericWindows Mobilemobile-browseryescloseclose0.195 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Mobile Safari 2.3WebKit Windows CE MotorolarolaWebKitsmartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari 2.3.0closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari 2.3.0closeWindows CE closeclosecloseclose0.017 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari 2.3.0closeWindows CE 7.0closecloseclosecloseclose0.086 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mobile Safari 2.3.0WebKit Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.515 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola WebKit Webkit 534.51Windows CE 7.0mobile:featureyescloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 2.3.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
closeLinux MotorolaEvokeFeature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.02 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 13:36:51 | by ThaDafinser