User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 8.12; MSIEMobile 6.0) acer_S200
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/os-windowsmobile.yaml
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0Windows Mobile 6.5 AcerneoTouch S200mobile:smartyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IEMobile 8.12Trident 3.1WinCE Mobile Phoneyes0.016 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
IEMobile 8.12closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE Mobile 8.12closeWindows AcerAcer S200mobile-browseryescloseclose0.21102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
IE Mobile 8.12Trident Windows CE AcerS200smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE Mobile 8.12closeWindows CE closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
IE Mobile 8.12closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.07501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer Mobile Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.61306 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0 Windows Mobile 6.5AcerneoTouch S200mobile:smartyescloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile AcerAcer S200Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.014 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 13:38:17 | by ThaDafinser