User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Linux sh4; U; HbbTV/1.1.1 (; INTEK; VT-100 HD+;;;) hdplusSmartTV/1.0 (NETRANGEMMH;) Bee/3.2 CE-HTML/1.0; FXM-U2FsdGVkX1+9IFast5+XgFhStntZ2aPC75KXhmr7DTyTjVYcbAaLpfmxnMmKiXRe-END; en) Presto/2.10.250 Version/11.60

Detected by 8 of 8 providers
As bot detected by 0 of 7

GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeActions
BrowscapPhp
6011
Opera 11.60Presto 2.10Linux Linux DesktopDesktop Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 11.60closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.1
Opera 11.60Presto GNU/Linux IntekVT-100tv Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 11.60closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
HbbTV 1.1.1closeLinux INTEKVT-100 HD+closeclosecloseclose Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.9
Opera Devices 3.2Presto 2.10.250 INTEKVT-100 HD+televisioncloseclose Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 11.60closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.50closeLinux armv7l SmartTVSmart-TVcloseclose 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 2016-01-26 16:41:26 | by ThaDafinser