User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux armv7l; U; HbbTV/1.1.1 (; INTEK; VANTAGE-ibox; 1.0; 1.0;) CE-HTML/1.0; FXM-U2FsdGVkX1+h0H+PQGvIkY1hx1djZ+X1R7vhB4maaA6ft4c7ZxQcruknL9ekvukS-END; en) Presto/2.9.167 Version/11.50
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
INTEKVANTAGE-ibox Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 11.50Presto 2.9Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.013 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 11.50closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 11.50closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.19202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 11.50Presto GNU/Linux IntekVANTAGEtv0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 11.50closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closeLinux INTEKVANTAGE-iboxcloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 11.50closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.15202 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 11.50Presto 2.9.167Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.1Presto 2.9.167 INTEKVANTAGE-iboxtelevisioncloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 11.50closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.011 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 13:28:09 | by ThaDafinser