User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux mips; U; xx) Presto/2.10.287 Version/12.00 DuneHD/1.0 (tv102; 130515_2104_b6) CE-HTML/1.0 NETRANGEMMH
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/tv.yml
Opera 12.00GNU/Linux Presto 2.10.287Dune HDtv102tv Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 12.00Presto 2.12Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.01 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 12.00closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 9.80closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.25002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 12.00Presto GNU/Linux Dune HDtv102tv0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 12.00 DuneHD/1.0 (tv102; 130515_2104_b6) CE-HTML/1.0 NETRANGEMMHcloseLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 12.0closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 12.00closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.06101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 12.0Presto 2.10.287Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.2Presto 2.10.287 Dune HDTV-102televisioncloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 12.00closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 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 13:27:24 | by ThaDafinser