User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux sh4; U; HbbTV/1.1.1(;;;;;); CE-HTML; TechniSat DIGIT ISIO S; xx) Presto/2.8.115 Version/11.10
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/television/other.yaml
Opera Devices 3.0 Presto 2.8.115TechniSatDIGIT ISIO Stelevision Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 11.10Presto 2.8Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.011 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 11.10closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 11.10closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.178 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 11.10Presto GNU/Linux TechniSatDIGIT ISIO Stv0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 11.10closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 11.10closeLinux TechniSatDIGIT ISIO Scloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 11.10closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.051 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 11.10Presto 2.8.115Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Devices 3.0Presto 2.8.115 TechniSatDIGIT ISIO Stelevisioncloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 11.10closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.11closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose0.01 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