User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux mips ; U; HbbTV/1.1.1 (; Philips; ; ; ; ) CE-HTML/1.0 NETTV/3.2.4; xx) Presto/2.6.33 Version/10.70
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/philips.yaml
Opera Devices 2.8 Presto 2.6.33PhilipsNet TVtelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 10.70Presto 2.2Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.01 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 10.70closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 10.70closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.19204 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 10.70Presto GNU/Linux PhilipsNetTV Seriestv0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 10.70closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closePhilips 2012Philipscloseclosecloseclose0.01601 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 10.70closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.07602 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 10.70Presto 2.6.33Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40908 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 2.8Presto 2.6.33 PhilipsNet TVtelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 10.70closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.013 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 13:41:55 | by ThaDafinser