User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.33 Safari/537.31 LGSmartTV/5.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/lg.yaml
Webkit 537.31LGSmart TVtelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 26.0WebKit Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.08101 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.33closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 26.0.1410.33closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.18202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 26.0WebKit GNU/Linux LGSmartTVsmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.33closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 26.0.1410closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 26.0.1410.33closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.06901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 26.0.1410.33WebKit 537.31Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Webkit 537.31 LGSmart TVtelevisioncloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.33closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.008 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 13:31:25 | by ThaDafinser