User agent detail

CE-HTML/1.0 NETTV/6.0.0 SmartTvA/3.0.0 (PhilipsTV, 6.1.1,) enMozilla/5.0 (Linux; QM152E Build/LMY47D) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/44.0.2403.61 Safari/537.36 OPR/31.0.1890.0 OMI/4.6.1.13.Sprinter.4

Detected by 7 of 8 providers
As bot detected by 0 of 7

GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeActions
BrowscapPhp
6011
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 31.0.1890.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.1
Opera 31.0Blink GNU/Linux PhilipsNetTV Seriestv Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 31.0.1890.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 31.0.1890closeLinux closeclosecloseclose Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.9
Opera Devices 4.6Blink 537.36Android TV PhilipsAndroid TV (2015) Net TVtelevisioncloseclose Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 31.0.1890.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.50closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose 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 2016-01-26 16:43:14 | by ThaDafinser