3 ms·
This feels a little redundant now that we have SPDY getting implemented in more and more places, particularly as the browsers that do best support WebSockets al
by jameskilton 15y ago
This feels a little redundant now that we have SPDY getting implemented in more and more places, particularly as the browsers that do best support WebSockets also support SPDY.
- fehguy 15y agoBoth browsers and servers need something like SwaggerSocket this--SPDY is a good step but i feel it's more of a "pipelining" solution rather than an async + multiplexing issue.
- SupermanScott 15y agoBut what about WebSockets in non-browser contexts. I have to wonder if Square does this with its SocketRocket http://corner.squareup.com/2012/02/socketrocket-websockets.html http://corner.squareup.com/2012/02/socketrocket-websockets.h... Think of desktop apps that keep a connection to the server and are awaiting messages from it. I think it might get interesting, maybe not the best application of WebSockets, but interesting. Your Email client wouldn't have to poll every X seconds to see if new mail has arrived.