6 ms·
Why? AFAICS, SPDY is open and available for everyone who wants to implement it. What's so bad about companies making it open, free and open source, thus contri
by eliben 15y ago
Why? AFAICS, SPDY is open and available for everyone who wants to implement it.
What's so bad about companies making it open, free and open source, thus contributing to a better Internet experience for everyone? No one limited SPDY to Google sites - Microsoft and Yahoo are free to implement it for their servers and enjoy browsing speedups with Chrome and (soon) Firefox 11.
- silentOpen 15y agoSo will my web server handle HTTP 1.1, SPDY, and HTTP Next then? Is Mozilla acting in the interest of the Open Web or was this a bargaining chip with their $300M default search provider deal?
- FooBarWidget 15y agoYes. Apache already has mod_spdy and nginx has plans to implement it. Browsers fallback to regular http if the server doesn't speak spdy. There are no disadvantages for you.
- silentOpen 15y agoSPDY may be technically sound but... Traffic is harder to debug. Google continues to act like it owns the Web. These are disadvantages for the world. Bring on the downvotes of the naive Googlers! This place was getting boring anyway...
- eliben 15y agoI think programmers have achieved harder tasks than detecting which protocol the server speaks and speaking its language, starting with the most optimal protocol and falling back to simpler and more common ones.