User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Digital AlphaServer 1000A 4/233; Windows NT; Powered By 64-Bit Alpha Processor)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-270.php
IE 4.01WinNT unknownunknown unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IE 4.01Trident WinNT Windows DesktopDesktop0.07 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 4.01closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.18704 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 4.01Trident Windows NTdesktop0.01 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE 4.1closeWindows closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows NT closecloseclosecloseclose0.04701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer 4.1Trident Windows DECDigital AlphaServercloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.36907 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Internet Explorer 4.0.1 Windows desktopcloseclose0.01 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE 4.01closeMac OS X Desktopcloseclose0.01 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 13:38:04 | by ThaDafinser