User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Web0S; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/537.41 (KHTML, like Gecko) Large Screen ISIS/0.2.1-64-r13 Safari/537.41
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/lg.yaml
Isis 0.2 Webkit 537.41LGwebOS TVtelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 537.41closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Safari 537.41closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.189 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Safari WebKit GNU/Linux desktop0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.075 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
WebKit 537.41Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.409 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Isis 0.2Webkit 537.41 LGwebOS TVtelevisioncloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.009 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 13:39:24 | by ThaDafinser