User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; SHARP/WS020SH; PPC; 480x800) Opera Mobi; Opera 9.5 [ja]
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/os-windowsmobile.yaml
Opera Mobile Windows CE SharpWS020SHmobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
IE 6.0Trident WinCE Mobile Phoneyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Mobicloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 9.5closeWindows GenericWindows Mobilemobile-browseryescloseclose0.18302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 9.5Presto Windows CE Sharpi-Style Q3ismartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mobi;closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mobile 9.5closeWindows CE closeclosecloseclose0.013 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mobile closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.04401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 9.5 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40204 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile Windows Mobile SharpWILLCOM 03 WS020SHmobile:smartyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
MAUI Browser close OperaMini 4Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.008 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 13:43:43 | by ThaDafinser