User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (SMART-TV; Linux; Tizen 2.2; SAMSUNG SM-Z910F) AppleWebKit/537.3 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/2.2 TV Safari/538.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-681.php
Samsung WebView 2.2Tizen 2.2unknown SamsungZMobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Samsung WebView 2.2WebKit Tizen 2.2SamsungZMobile Phoneyesyes0.016 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Safari 2.2closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.18302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Safari 2.2WebKit Tizen 2.2SamsungSM-Z910Fsmartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari 2.2closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari 2.2closeLinux SamsungSM-Z910Fcloseclosecloseclose0.011 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari 2.2closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.04901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
WebKit 537.3Smart TV Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Webkit 537.3Tizen 2.2SamsungZ Smart TVtelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 2.2closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 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 13:30:15 | by ThaDafinser