User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (U; Linux ICE4200; C) AppleWebKit/534.26 mbxtWebKit/1.0.0_pre-alpha (intelce)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/browser-machblue.yaml
MachBlue XT 1.0 Webkit 534.26television Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebKit 534.26closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
MachBlue XT 1.0.0close media-playercloseclose0.19 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
GNU/Linux desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.015 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mozilla 5.0WebKit 534.26Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.407 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
MachBlue XT 1.0Webkit 534.26 televisioncloseclose0.008 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
No result found

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 13:36:47 | by ThaDafinser