User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux mipsel; U; HbbTV/1.1.1 (; TOSHIBA; DTV_RL938; 7.0.21.6; a5; ) ; ToshibaTP/1.3.0 (+VIDEO_MP4+VIDEO_X_MS_ASF+AUDIO_MPEG+AUDIO_MP4+DRM+NATIVELAUNCH+WEBSTORAGE+OFFLINEAPP+HAS_CMD_HTTP_SERVER) ; de) AppleWebKit/534.1 (KHTML, like
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
TOSHIBADTV_RL938 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebKit 534.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
close media-playercloseclose0.20102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
GNU/Linux ToshibaDTV RL938tv0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closeLinux TOSHIBADTV_RL938closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mozilla WebKit 534.1Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Webkit 534.1 ToshibaRegza RL938 Smart TVtelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.012 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 13:31:55 | by ThaDafinser