User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux armv7l ; U; HbbTV/1.1.1 (; TOSHIBA; 55ZL1; 19.7.61.14; 3; ) ; ToshibaTP/1.3.0 (+VIDEO_MP4+AUDIO_MPEG+AUDIO_MP4) ; de) 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 2.6.33Toshiba55ZL1tv Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 10.60Presto 2.2Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.009 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 10.60closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 10.60closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.18 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 10.60Presto GNU/Linux Toshiba55ZL1tv0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 10.60closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closeLinux TOSHIBA55ZL1closeclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 10.60closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.118 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 10.60Presto 2.6.33Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.516 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 2.8Presto 2.6.33 ToshibaZL1 Cevo Smart TVtelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 10.60closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 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 13:43:18 | by ThaDafinser