User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux mips; U; ; xx) Presto/2.10.287 Version/12.00 HbbTV/1.1.1 (; VESTEL; MB90; 1.0; 1.0;) CE-HTML/1.0 NETRANGEMMH iplayerV3
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/other.yaml
Opera Devices 3.2 Presto 2.10.287VestelMB90television 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-browsercloseclose1.307 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 12.00Presto GNU/Linux VestelMB90tv0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 12.00 HbbTV/1.1.1 (; VESTEL; MB90; 1.0; 1.0;) CE-HTML/1.0 NETRANGEMMH iplayerV3closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closeLinux VESTELMB90closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 12.00closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.048 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 12.0Presto 2.10.287Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.406 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.2Presto 2.10.287 VestelMB90televisioncloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 12.00closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.007 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 13:30:42 | by ThaDafinser