User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux armv6l; U; NETRANGEMMH;HbbTV/1.1.1;CE-HTML/1.0;PEAQ LF1V368; en) Presto/2.10.250 Version/11.60
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
PEAQLF1V368 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 11.60Presto 2.10Linux Smartphone OS Linux DesktopDesktop0.012 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 11.60closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 11.60closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.221 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 11.60Presto GNU/Linux PEAQLF1V368tv0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 11.60closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 11.60closeLinux PEAQLF1V368closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 11.60closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.063 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 11.60Presto 2.10.250Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.417 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.2Presto 2.10.250 televisioncloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 11.60closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 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 13:29:54 | by ThaDafinser