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
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/philips.yaml
Opera Devices 4.6Android TV Blink 537.36PhilipsAndroid TV (2015) Net TVtelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 31.0.1890.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 44.0.2403.61closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.25603 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 31.0Blink GNU/Linux PhilipsNetTV Seriestv0.014 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 31.0.1890.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 31.0.1890closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 44.0.2403.61closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.06801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 31.0.1890.0WebKit 537.36Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41104 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 4.6Blink Android TV PhilipsAndroid TV (2015) Net TVtelevisioncloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 31.0.1890.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.009 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 13:26:12 | by ThaDafinser