User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux mips; ) Presto/2.12.407 Version/12.51 MB90/3.3.8.e (SHARP, Si2156LG32, wired) HbbTV/1.1.1 (; CUS:SHARP; MB90; 3.3.8.e; 1.0;) CE-HTML/1.0 NETRANGEMMH iplayerV3
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/tv.yml
Opera 12.51GNU/Linux Presto 2.12.407SharpSi2156LG32tv Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 12.51closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 9.80closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.23602 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 12.51Presto GNU/Linux SharpSi2156LG32tv0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 12.51 MB90/3.3.8.e (SHARP, Si2156LG32, wired) HbbTV/1.1.1 (; CUS:SHARP; MB90; 3.3.8.e; 1.0;) CE-HTML/1.0 NETRANGEMMH iplayerV3closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closeLinux SHARPMB90closeclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 12.51closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.08401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 12.51Presto 2.12.407Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.4Presto 2.12.407 SharpMB90 Smart TVtelevisioncloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 12.51closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.014 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 13:43:46 | by ThaDafinser