3 ms·
12.75s vs 1.40s. This is quite impressive - looking forward to a faster Web, slowly migrating to HTTP/2. Any clue if Amazon CDN service is / will offer HTTP/2
by jpmonette 11y ago
12.75s vs 1.40s. This is quite impressive - looking forward to a faster Web, slowly migrating to HTTP/2.
Any clue if Amazon CDN service is / will offer HTTP/2 support too?
- JustSomeNobody 11y agoYou won't get a faster web, you'll just get more cruft shoved on each page.
- callum85 11y agoI don't think the limiting factor in "how much cruft should we add" is bandwidth. It's the point at which it becomes so hard to use that users leave. Example: Buzzfeed loads in 1 second for me on my work's broadband, but it's still full of junk making it hard to use. Bandwidth-wise, it could handle more crap on the page, but in terms of usability it's at the limit. I think you actually will get a faster and generally improved web when sites are finally able to end HTTP/1 support, because it will free up web developers from old performance hacks like asset concatenation, image sprites etc, which add a lot of friction to making websites. All that said, this demo is bullshit for the reasons given in other comments.