Global Internet Traffic Surprises

Written by Evan Schuman
November 17th, 2010

From the perspective of the E-Commerce director at many of the largest global e-tailers, the Web is the great equalizer, allowing for entry into foreign markets with a minimal amount of reprogramming and language/currency changes. But the Internet isn’t really all that equal, at least as far as Internet access speeds are concerned. And given that these speeds dictate how far E-Commerce can—and should—go, those are important numbers.

That’s why new figures from Pingdom (based on raw data released by Akamai) offer an intriguing roadmap for global Web players. The countries with the fastest speeds are concentrated in Asia, which isn’t surprising, but the specific order is, with South Korea blowing all other countries away. These are also all actual connection speeds, as opposed to what ISPs are marketing.

South Korea’s number one slot was earned with an average connection speed of 16.63 Mbit/second, which almost doubled the second place winner (Hong Kong) at 8.57 Mbit/second. Japan came in third at 8.03 Mbits/second.

Many of the rest of the top are a series of unlikely winners: Romania at 6.8; the Netherlands at 6.5; Sweden at 5.5; Czech Republic at 5.32; Belgium at 5.26; Denmark at 5.18 and Switzerland at 5.08.

That was the Top Ten. It’s not until slot 11 that North America makes an appearance, with Canada at 4.73, followed by the U.S. at 4.6. Going down the list gets us to Hungary at 4.45, Germany at 4.14, Taiwan at 4.08, Portugal at 3.93 and then, at slot 17, the U.K. at 3.93, followed by Austria at 3.76, France at 3.36, Israel at 3.29, Greece at 3.03, Italy at 3.0 and Poland at 2.93, which is slot 23.

Then comes Thailand at 2.9 and Australia at 2.86.

At the bottom of the list, we have the slowest ten: The Philippines at 0.9; China at 8.86; Kazakhstan at 0.85; Egypt at 0.83; India at 0.82; Pakistan at 0.72; Venezuela at 0.72; Indonesia at 0.5; Nigeria at 0.5; and the slowest slot going to Iran at 0.41.

One nice touch that Pingdom added in its report was noting the size of the country’s Internet user population. This nicely illustrates some conflicts, such as that the fourth-largest population of Internet users (India) is almost at the very bottom of the speed list. The world’s largest Internet population (China) didn’t perform much better. And the world’s second-largest Internet population (the U.S.) fared somewhat better, but not breaking the top ten is a sad statement.

On the flip side, Hong Kong commands the second-highest performance, with an Internet-using population size that ranks 49th. South Korea’s impressive top slot exists, even though its Internet population doesn’t quite break the Top Ten (it’s 11).

This means that you should feel free to animate as much as you want for your South Korean prospects, while you might want to shrink the graphics when marketing to Australia.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.