User agent detail

SonyEricssonJ108/R7EA Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 UNTRUSTED/1.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; ) Opera
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SonyEricssonJ108 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 4.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 4.0close desktop-browsercloseclose0.18902 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 4.0Trident Sony EricssonCedarfeature phoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE 4.0close SonyEricssonJ108closeclosecloseclose0.017 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera close closecloseclosecloseclose0.11401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Sony EricssonSony Ericsson J108closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.46105 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Internet Explorer 4.0 Sony EricssonCedarmobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.0closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close SonyEricssonJ108aFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.029 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 13:43:42 | by ThaDafinser