User agent detail

OPR/22.0.1481.0 OMI/4.2.12.29, KreaTV/0.0.0.0 (ARRIS, IPC1100, wired)CM[00.01]
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/tv.yml
Opera 22.0.1481.0 Blink ARRISIPC1100tv Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 22.0.1481.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Devices 4.2close media-playercloseclose0.204 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 22.0Blink ARRISIPC1100tv0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 22.0.1481.0 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.409 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 4.2 ArrisIPC1100 KreaTVtelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close Desktopcloseclose0.014 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 13:39:10 | by ThaDafinser