User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux sh4; HbbTV/1.2.1 (;Sharp;LE652;v0.2.3.3;;) CE-HTML/1.0 Config(L:deu,CC:DEU) NETRANGEMMH) Presto/2.12.362 Version/12.10
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SharpLE652 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 12.10Presto 2.12Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.011 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 12.10closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 12.10closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.18302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 12.10Presto GNU/Linux SharpLE652tv0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 12.10closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.2.1closeLinux SharpLE652closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 12.10closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.04901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 12.10Presto 2.12.362Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.4Presto 2.12.362 SharpLE652televisioncloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 12.10closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.012 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 13:27:19 | by ThaDafinser