User agent detail

SonyEricssonT290i/R101
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close SonyEricssonT290iclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
SonyEricssonT290i R101closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

close Sony EricssonT290imobile-browseryescloseclose0.23401 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Sony EricssonT290ifeature phoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close SonyEricssonT290icloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.16301 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Sony EricssonSony Ericsson T290icloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23901 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Sony EricssonT290imobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close SonyEricssonT290iFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.026 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
close SonyEricssonT290icloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 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 2016-05-10 07:56:43 | by ThaDafinser