3 ms·
A commenter on Ars, iAPX, put it best: > The problem is not HTTP over TCP, it is out-sourced Ads > and trackers. > > 67 requests, 1.0MB transferred, 1.
by wahern 8y ago
A commenter on Ars, iAPX, put it best:
> The problem is not HTTP over TCP, it is out-sourced Ads
> and trackers.
>
> 67 requests, 1.0MB transferred, 1.48s with AdBlock Plus
> and my own Tracker Blocking Chrome Extension.
> 263 requests, 2.8MB transferred, 26.92s without any of
> that.
> This is the home page of Ars Technica as I write it (full
> reload).
>
> Do you think that HTTP/3 will generate 4X less request,
> will be 3X faster to transfer and will be 18X faster to
> complete loading?!?
>
> This is not an HTTP problem, this a website design and
> abuse of ads and tracker problem ;)
> Google is trying to solve or hide a Google created
> problem.
-- https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/the-next-version-of-http-wont-be-using-tcp/?comments=1&post=36350073 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/the-next-version-of-...
Because those requests include many different domains, the benefit of QUIC is substantially blunted.
- dcbadacd 8y agoAnti-bloat has been peddled for a long time, it hasn't worked, it's time to mitigate those effects with adblockers, your wallet and new protocols.
- wahern 8y agoSure, simply admonishing developers and companies to reduce bloat won't do much to improve the situation. But neither will QUIC. That's the point. All QUIC effectively does is add more complexity to the technology stack, making real innovation more difficult by increasing the fixed costs.