Twitter Dead Last In Social Network Uptime

Written by Evan Schuman
May 9th, 2008

With its sites being unavailable for barely one hour over four months, MySpace has the best uptime of any major social networking site and Twitter (more than 37 hours of downtime during the same period) has the worst.

Those stats come courtesy of Pingdom’s periodic uptime surveys, which tracked some 16 social networking sites from January 1 through April 30 of this year.

Leading site MySpace had the least downtime, achieving an uptime percent of 99.96 with its one hour and five minutes of downtime. Facebook was several notches below MySpace, with 2 hours and 29 minutes of downtime and a 99.91 percent uptime rating.

Not only was Twitter’s 37 hours and 16 minutes of downtime the worst in the group, it was almost double the amount of downtime from the second worst-performing site (, with 18 hours and 55 minutes of downtime). But even Twitter’s numbers amounted to an uptime that sounded good: 98.72 percent. Pingdom’s Peter Alguacil said those percentages can be misleading.

"A 99 percent uptime may sound like much, and this is a rather common misconception. But if you do the math, it means that your site will be unavailable for more than 7 hours in a 30-day month," Alguacil said. "For an e-tailer, losing 7 hours of sales in a month isn’t a very good thing, not to mention what happens to customer trust when they visit your site and find it unavailable. The 98.72 percent average uptime that Twitter had in January through April is the equivalent of more than 9 hours of downtime. That’s roughly an entire workday."

Asked what he would consider an acceptable—as opposed to a good—figure, Alguacil said about 99.5 percent uptime, which is about 3 hours and 36 minutes of being down. "I think that could be considered a kind of ‘lower acceptable boundary.’ If you find your uptime consistently slipping under this, you have a problem," he said.

Other sites tracked were Reunion, Pownce, Bebo, Hi5, Windows Live Spaces, LinkedIn, Friendster,, Orkut, Facebook,, Yahoo 360, LiveJournal and Xanga.


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.