User agent detail

Opera/10.60 (Linux sh4 ; U; HBBTV/1.0 (; LOH/2.01; -----;;;) CE-HTML/1.0 Config(Hotel,L:de,CC:DE); en) Presto/2.6.33 Version/10.60
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/tv.yml
Opera 10.60GNU/Linux Presto tv Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 10.60Presto 2.2Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.012 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 10.60closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 10.60closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.17905 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 10.60Presto GNU/Linux PanasonicVIERA 2011tv0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 10.60closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 10.60closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.021 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 10.60closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.09703 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 10.60Presto 2.6.33Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41312 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 2.8Presto 2.6.33 televisioncloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 10.60closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 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 13:37:32 | by ThaDafinser