Slashdot Mirror


2 Chinese ISPs Serve 20% of World Broadband Users

suraj.sun writes with this excerpt from Ars Technica: "If you need a reminder of just how big China is—and just how important the Internet has become there—consider this stat: between them, two Chinese ISPs serve 20 percent of all broadband subscribers in the entire world and both companies continue to grow, even as growth slows significantly in more developed markets. Every other ISP trails dramatically. Japan's NTT comes in third with 17 million subscribers, and all US providers are smaller still. 'The gap between the top two operators and the world's remaining broadband service providers will continue to grow rapidly,' said TeleGeography Research Director Tania Harvey. 'Aside from the two Chinese companies, all of the top ten broadband ISPs operate in mature markets, with high levels of broadband penetration and rapidly slowing subscriber growth.'"

25 of 110 comments (clear)

  1. And they only get 20% of the internet? by hawkeyeMI · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or something like that.

    --
    Error 404 - Sig Not Found
    1. Re:And they only get 20% of the internet? by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 2, Interesting

      On average, Internet access is ~30% cheaper in China than in the US, which is actually fucking expensive for China if you consider the average salary in China vs. average Salary in the US.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    2. Re:And they only get 20% of the internet? by Nursie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why another nail in the coffin?

      If their pay catches up then they lose the competetive advantage and investment in the US becomes more viable again, surely?

  2. Choice by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And I bet the two ISPs serve different regions, in which case citizens wouldn't even get to choose between A and B.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Choice by creat3d · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You seem to confuse American Idol/football stats with "accurate information on world affairs" or "unfiltered news on one's own country/government"... Do you work for the Chinese government or are you always this stupid?

      --
      Grammar nazis are to this community what excrements are to gold.
    2. Re:Choice by koxkoxkox · · Score: 4, Informative

      Exactly, at least in the Beijing area where I live. They precisely delimited which area each company serve, and redirect you to the other one if you call them but are not in their area.

    3. Re:Choice by euyis · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually there're choices - some time earlier the huge China telecommunications company broke up and became two separate corporations, with Netcom (later merged with Unicom as per orders from the government in order to "create more competition" and "optimize the structure") serving north China and Telecom serving south. They expanded into the rival's territories rapidly and actually competed with each other at the beginning, but the two biggest ISPs soon realized that competition was not a good idea for them and signed a "truce" restricting themselves to current distribution, for Telecom no further north and Netcom no further south.

      And the "choices" are nothing more than different flavours of the same shit - you get the same shitty Internet (eh, Intranet with some access to outside) with different ISP advertisements (deep packet inspection & inserting HTML codes) fucking up your pages and trojan horse PPPoE dialers.

  3. The view from the other side... by thej1nx · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The statement in the article could also be translated, less flatteringly, to "Rest of the world has already achieved adequate penetration of internet for most of their population, while China still has long way to go".

    Keep in mind that in already saturated markets, like Tania Harvey says, growth of the market becomes pretty slow. Almost everyone in Japan, for example, already uses internet on PC or their cellphones etc. The companies may get customers to switch between them, but finding new customers is much harder.

    Not to mention the "quality" of internet, one gets in China, what with half of it being blocked out/censored anyways. Long way to go before they catch up with the rest of the world.

  4. Developing vs. Developed by DigiShaman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is this really news?

    At all levels, China's GDP continues to grow while western nations stagnate or creep forward. China is developing while the west has already developed it products and service offerings. Eventually, they will reach a saturation point like the west and slow down. But get ready to accept them as the 1# economic super power when that happens. Simply put, they have far more human resources to tap into. The only thing holding them back right now is local politics.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Developing vs. Developed by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your post should be modded funny. China's growth has only started when and to the extent to it opened it's economy to capitalism. It's nothing to do with central planning. It's to do with selling off its vast population as a cheap labor force for capitalist (initially mostly Western, Japanese and Taiwanese, and more recently Chinese) companies.

      Btw, sure you can accomplish a specific goal in the short term if you turn a nation of 100 million into 100 million slave laborers dedicated to that goal, and sacrifice a few million lives in the process, but that strategy ain't gonna work for long. Can't believe there are still Stalin apologists around today.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    2. Re:Developing vs. Developed by EEPROMS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are seriously deranged if you think China "with over 500 million people earning less than $2 a day" (higher than India) is a economic light for the rest of us to follow. The reality is China needs 12% growth just stop going backwards when compared to the west.

    3. Re:Developing vs. Developed by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

      One piece of data for those thinking China is just about to take over: China GDP per capita $6,500 (slightly better than Namibia, slightly worse than El Salvador). by comparison USA: $46,000. As far as living standards go, China has a looong way to go and some major transformations on the way.

      It's sometimes useful to think of China as two countries; a somewhat-developed country of about 400 million, mostly in the coastal provinces, plus another 900 million rural peasants. There's a formal registration system ("hukou") to enforce this division, tying peasants to their home area. It's not as rigid as it once was, but it's still in effect. Most of the economic gains are being realized by urban workers.

  5. Re:20%? by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I bet it's >75% of the infected/pwned machines if the logs from my servers are any indication......

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  6. Pfff by BitHive · · Score: 4, Funny

    I bet if they deregulate they could get that down to just one ISP.

  7. Define broadband by voss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do you define it as 256kbps(like the US did until 2 years ago), 1.5 mbps(at&t basic DSL), 10m(comcast), 25-50mbps(FIOS,uverse, next gen comcast)?

    in the US there are plenty of users who cant yet get above 5 mbps.

    1. Re:Define broadband by adtifyj · · Score: 4, Funny

      Broadband is faster than dialup.

      You'll go far with definitions like that.

  8. Monopolies Are Bigger Than Cartels by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know what the point of this story is. China's a mafia economy, Japan's is state capitalism, America's is based on cartels that compete within with each other, but primarily defend their mutual cartel from any newcomer. None of that is good.

    A healthy Internet is one that's highly distributed, decentralized. The more ISPs per person, the healthier and more stable the Internet. The more Chinese it is, the worse.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Monopolies Are Bigger Than Cartels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You are mistaken. Russia's may be a mafia economy, China's definitely not. It's more like Japan's state capitalism.

      You are also mistaken to assume that China ONLY has 2 ISPs - absolutely wrong. China probably has more ISPs than US or any other country. The original article merely states that two big ISPs from China have highest subscriber counts - not market share percentages!! Big distinction.

      In fact, China's ISP industry, for quite a while anyway, suffers from hyper cut-throat competition and low capital concentration. Too many ISPs with too little investment capital.

      You don't seem to know much about Chinese ISP industry (nor about Japan's economy or America's presumably), but very bold in making sweeping statements. Suggest you make statement on what a healthy Internet would to be (which you may qualify) but not what Chinese are or are not (which you certainly are not qualified).

    2. Re:Monopolies Are Bigger Than Cartels by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am not mistaken. China's economy is mafia. The government is the mafia. It enforces its policies by brutal force, it is highly corrupt, the people have no rights protected, only protected by fear of a counterrevolution or a discouraged work slowdown. The government exploits labor and nature to ruination, enforced by fear of violence. Crime is OK for cronies, competition is prohibited outside of what benefits the rulers. That's a mafia economy. In Russia, the mafia is part of the economy, but the government itself is a mafia mostly only in the energy industry.

      I didn't say China has only two ISPs, you did. Anonymous strawman Coward, I know more about China and its economy than you care to admit, because you're just another Chinese apologist. I wouldn't be surprised if you work for China's propaganda ministry.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  9. What does "serve" mean? by swb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does this mean as actual paying subscribers to a private residence?

    Or does this mean "providing internet access to" some large group of people who primarily use internet cafes, cell phones or some other shared access method?

  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. Re:China has 20% of the world's population! by daveime · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's news because unlike other countries, which just talk about it, China sets a goal of giving every user Broadband access, then DOES IT.

  12. Impossible! by Ecuador · · Score: 2, Funny

    The numbers simply don't add up:
    -We know Chinese ISP's block all interesting content like pr0n.
    -We know at least 95% of internet users browse pr0n almost daily.

    So how can this be? :)

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  13. Re:That is wildly inaccurate by Urkki · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Competition is the only thing that is able to drive prices lower without creating shortages. No competition means higher prices.

    That only applies to completely free markets (and sometimes doesn't even work there). It only applies there because with no competition, the companies can and will charge as much as people are willing to spend ("Oh? We are the only company that sells fuel in this area? Fuel that people desperately need. We can charge whatever the fuck we want!") and with competition they are forced to lower their profit margins.

    A regulatory body can look at the cost of materials, etc. and say "You really would be able to offer the service for X... You arent allowed to charge more than X+Y at most. If you are too incompetent to offer the service for that price, we will find someone more competent.". Of course, you can call that a form of competition (and yes, competition can and needs to exist even in completely socialistic systems) and you would be correct... But I doubt it is the kind of competition you had in mind there.

    But how do you come up with X and Y? With sufficient lobbying/bribing, Y can be increased, since it's just arbitrary profit margin, essentially a cartel imposed by the government. Also in most businesses, X changes all the time, sometimes even rapidly. The regulatory body would need to be constantly re-calculating proper value of X, or there will be trouble one way or the other. And the people doing the re-calculating have no personal interest in getting the real value for X (unless you enter corruption, in which case they actually have interest in getting false value of X). And sometimes there will be somebody higher up that just comes in and says something like "I just heard that over there X+Y is this much, so it must be lower here because we are better than them, so make sure you calculate it so that it is", with no regard to reality.

    Also, even though you'd imagine that businesses would still want to optimize to maximize profits, that's far less motivation than optimizing in order to not be driven out of business by more innovative competitor. Also, if any optimization goes to maximize profits, then the business owners benefit, unlike when optimization goes to lower the price (to gain market share from competitor).

    In short, that doesn't work terribly well. Only thing that can determine correct value of X and optimal value of Y is the market itself. Your kind of regulation just doesn't work, and the longer the regulation continues, the farther it will drift from the optimum, and the more corruption will sneak into the system.

    Only places where free market really doesn't work is markets where the goal is to minimize the business. For example health care, military, security: there the goal should be to minimize the need for that service, while business interest is to maximize need for their service. And another place for heavy regulation is business where there can be no competition for practical reasons, ie. "natural monopolies". But even in those cases, regulation doesn't work well, just better than free market would.

  14. I KNEW it! by dave562 · · Score: 2, Funny

    People have always tried to tell me that spam is automatically generated, but I KNEW BETTER! I knew, deep down in my soul that it was really millions of Chinese peasants, hooked up to TTY machines, flooding teh intarwebz with router clogging texts and Bayesian fooling, poorly constructed English non-sense.