User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux mipsel; U; HbbTV/1.1.1 (; TOSHIBA; DTV_L4300; 7.2.67.18.01.1; a5; ) ; ToshibaTP/2.0.0 (+DRM) ; xx) AppleWebKit/537.4 (KHTML, like Gecko) TOSHIBA-DTV (DTV_L4300; 7.2.67.18.01.1; 2013A; NA)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/toshiba.yaml
Webkit 537.4ToshibaRegza L4300 Smart TVtelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebKit 537.4closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
close media-playercloseclose0.21102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
GNU/Linux ToshibaNetTV Seriestv0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closeTOSHIBA 2013TOSHIBADTV_L4300closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.09601 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mozilla 5.0WebKit 537.4Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Webkit 537.4 ToshibaRegza L4300 Smart TVtelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 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 13:32:16 | by ThaDafinser