User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux mips; Opera TV Store/5921; HbbTV/1.2.1 (PVR; Humax; hms1000sph2; DESFAB 1.01.01; 1.0.0; wired; UX-PRISM--OP-NONE); ce-html/1.0) Presto/2.12.407 Version/12.50 Model/Humax-TestingDevice
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/other.yaml
Opera Devices 3.4 Presto 2.12.407HumaxHMS-1000S Digital Receivertelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 12.50Presto 2.12Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.007 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 12.50closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 9.80closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 12.50Presto GNU/Linux HumaxHMS-1000Stv0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 12.50 Model/Humax-TestingDevicecloseLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.2.1closeLinux Humaxhms1000sph2closeclosecloseclose0.014 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 12.50closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.052 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 12.50Presto 2.12.407Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.415 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.4Presto 2.12.407 HumaxHMS-1000S Digital Receivertelevisioncloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 12.50closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 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 13:29:57 | by ThaDafinser