User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux armv7l) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/32.0.1700.107 Safari/537.36 OPR/19.0.1325.0 OMI/4.1.4.56.ALSAN3.7 SonyCEBrowser/1.0 (BDPlayer; BDP10G_AX; BDP2015/M24.D.0104; XAE;)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/sony.yaml
Opera Devices 4.1 Blink 537.36SonyBDP10G Blu-ray Playertelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 19.0Blink Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.27003 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 19.0.1325.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 19.0.1325.0closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.194 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 19.0Blink GNU/Linux SonyCEBrowsersmartphoneyes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 19.0.1325.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 19.0.1325closeLinux SonyCEBrowsercloseclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 32.0.1700.107closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.048 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 19.0.1325.0WebKit 537.36Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.408 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 4.1Blink SonyBDP10G Blu-ray Playertelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 19.0.1325.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.013 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 13:25:56 | by ThaDafinser