User agent detail

HTC_Touch Cruise Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC; 240x320; HTC_Touch Cruise)/UC Browser7.7.1.88
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCTouch Cruise Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 7.7WebKit Android Mobile Phoneyesyes0.02901 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 4.01closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.18804 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.7 Windows CE HTCTouch Cruisesmartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.7.1closeWindows CE HTCTouch Cruisecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 4.01closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.07401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.7.1.88 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.35707 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.7Gecko Windows Mobile HTCTouch Cruisemobile:smartyescloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.01closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile HTCTouch CruiseFeature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.02101 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 13:41:56 | by ThaDafinser