User agent detail

acer_S200 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; Windows Phone 6.5)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_os.yaml
Windows Phone 6.5 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IEMobile 6.0Trident 3.1WinXP 5.1AcerS200Mobile Phoneyes0.008 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 6.0closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.17802 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 6.0Trident Windows Phone 6.5AcerS200smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows XPcloseWindows Phonecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE 6.0closeWindows Phone 6.5closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 6.0closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.047 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer 6.0Trident Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40804 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Mobile Internet Explorer 6.0 Windows Mobile 6.5AcerneoTouch S200mobile:smartyescloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
closeWindows Phone 6.5AcerAcer S200Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.025 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 13:40:18 | by ThaDafinser