3 ms·

I already did give you a better source in my previous comment. Here's another that measures something slightly different. It took all of 10 seconds to google: h

by xiaoma 10y ago

I already did give you a better source in my previous comment. Here's another that measures something slightly different. It took all of 10 seconds to google: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats7.htm http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats7.htm China has nearly a billion regular internet users and there are over a hundred million overseas Chinese speakers. Finding a "source" on the internet is great and all but at least run it past a basic sanity check. Given the enormous population gap, how could Russian possibly have more of an internet presence than Chinese?

lacampbell 10y ago
Well for one thing, our stats are about completely different things. Mine are about the language of web sites. Yours is about the language of web users. So yes, an orange is different to an apple. I agree.
- xiaoma 10y ago
  I'm sorry but 2% is way off. Far more web sites than that are Chinese. Your "stats" were calculated from total domains and the data from Alexa. While Alexa is good for the highest traffic sites, not that many Chinese internet users install an Alexa toolbar and not that many web masters install any of the tracking tools Alexa pulls from. The Chinese internet is fairly unique, has different search engines, has social media sites and has different analytics providers. FWIW: I have worked in both US and Chinese tech companies and have familiarity with both ecosystems.
  - lacampbell 10y ago
    Ok, so here's the situation. - I used a search engine to find the breakdown of websites by language, and quoted from it. - You disputed it, telling me to look at the Alexa top 500 sites (which is a completely different stat). - You then gave me another source, which is the language spoken by internet users. Again, a completely different stat. - You now tell me that my source is useless, because the data is from Alexa - which a few minutes ago you were telling me was a better source of data (even though it was for a different stat). - Now you're trying to convince me that the percentage of websites that are in Chinese is higher based on your feelings and intuition. This is tedious. Either provide me with some concrete stats, or admit you don't know - but that you suspect it's higher.
    - xiaoma 10y ago
      I do know and I have read stats on it in Chinese and (I think) in English as well. I don't have time to do your research for you and to be blunt, it would be hard to interpret its credibility if you're unfamiliar with the Chinese online ecosystem. I've already explained the problem with the survey you shared (which was based on Alexa data from years ago). If you are determined to believe that only 2% of all web content is in Chinese and that Italian and Portuguese are more common site languages, then so be it. I'm done on this thread.
      - lacampbell 10y ago
        Oh, you once maybe read some statistics somewhere in a language you can't remember that I wouldn't understand anyway because I'm "unfamiliar with the Chinese online ecosystem"? Completely worthless. I never said I didn't believe my data was flawed, or that I am determined to believe the 2% figure. But you have consistently failed to provide any evidence to the contrary.
      - aaron695 10y ago
        For love of god, you are wrong. OP had a link that proved you wrong, if you think you are right, either link somewhere else or just say your gut feeling is the original link is incorrect but can't prove it, stop linking totally off topic stuff it drives people nuts. OP was incorrect in that the link is websites, not webpages though :)

by xiaoma 10y ago

lacampbell 10y ago

Well for one thing, our stats are about completely different things. Mine are about the language of web sites. Yours is about the language of web users. So yes, an orange is different to an apple. I agree.

xiaoma 10y ago
I'm sorry but 2% is way off. Far more web sites than that are Chinese. Your "stats" were calculated from total domains and the data from Alexa. While Alexa is good for the highest traffic sites, not that many Chinese internet users install an Alexa toolbar and not that many web masters install any of the tracking tools Alexa pulls from. The Chinese internet is fairly unique, has different search engines, has social media sites and has different analytics providers. FWIW: I have worked in both US and Chinese tech companies and have familiarity with both ecosystems.
- lacampbell 10y ago
  Ok, so here's the situation. - I used a search engine to find the breakdown of websites by language, and quoted from it. - You disputed it, telling me to look at the Alexa top 500 sites (which is a completely different stat). - You then gave me another source, which is the language spoken by internet users. Again, a completely different stat. - You now tell me that my source is useless, because the data is from Alexa - which a few minutes ago you were telling me was a better source of data (even though it was for a different stat). - Now you're trying to convince me that the percentage of websites that are in Chinese is higher based on your feelings and intuition. This is tedious. Either provide me with some concrete stats, or admit you don't know - but that you suspect it's higher.
  - xiaoma 10y ago
    I do know and I have read stats on it in Chinese and (I think) in English as well. I don't have time to do your research for you and to be blunt, it would be hard to interpret its credibility if you're unfamiliar with the Chinese online ecosystem. I've already explained the problem with the survey you shared (which was based on Alexa data from years ago). If you are determined to believe that only 2% of all web content is in Chinese and that Italian and Portuguese are more common site languages, then so be it. I'm done on this thread.
    - lacampbell 10y ago
      Oh, you once maybe read some statistics somewhere in a language you can't remember that I wouldn't understand anyway because I'm "unfamiliar with the Chinese online ecosystem"? Completely worthless. I never said I didn't believe my data was flawed, or that I am determined to believe the 2% figure. But you have consistently failed to provide any evidence to the contrary.
    - aaron695 10y ago
      For love of god, you are wrong. OP had a link that proved you wrong, if you think you are right, either link somewhere else or just say your gut feeling is the original link is incorrect but can't prove it, stop linking totally off topic stuff it drives people nuts. OP was incorrect in that the link is websites, not webpages though :)