5 ms·

This is the first release with SPDY enabled by default. Once most Firefox users have updated, about half of all web traffic will be from SPDY-enabled browsers.

sp332 14y ago
Here's a tiny restartless addon that shows if the page you're on is using SPDY: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/spdy-indicator/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/spdy-indicato...
- shmerl 14y ago
  Thanks! That's useful.
- sohn 14y ago
  Give me examples of pages that have it
thomasnext 14y ago
Citation needed! What about users of old versions of Chrome, for example?
- jevinskie 14y ago
  Aren't Chrome users almost always using the latest version because of the auto-update by default?
  - Erunno 14y ago
    Apparently not. There's an ever growing tail of users who get stuck with an outdated version [1]. It's not as bad as Firefox yet but surprising nonetheless given how much effort Google put into Chrome's update system. [1] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-browser-usage-firefox-users-still-avoiding-updates/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-br...
    - SquareWheel 14y ago
      Wow, those charts are fantastic.
    - alanh 14y ago
      I have personally experienced and seen Chrome get “stuck” and kind of just fail to update itself until a manual re-download of the installer is performed. It does usually work, but sometimes just stops. For example, I recently saw a bug report from someone who thought they were on the most recent version of Chrome — 10. (It’s currently at 19 or so.)
- mbrubeck 14y ago
  Chrome has had SPDY enabled for at least a year now -- since around Chrome 10, I think? And according to Statcounter measurements for this month to date [1], 28.75% of all page views currently come from Chrome 19. From the same Statcounter numbers, 17.27% of all page views are from Firefox 12. So that's over 46% of page views this month using the latest versions of Chrome and Firefox. And another few percent are just one or two versions behind. So a couple of months from now, 50% of page views measured by Statcounter should come from SPDY-enabled browsers, especially if IE marketshare keeps shrinking rapidly. [1] http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206-201206-bar http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206...
  - kibwen 14y ago
    Also interesting: according to that graph, as of June 2012, Firefox's major stable release at last surpassed IE's major stable release--just a few months shy of the 10-year anniversary of the release of Firefox 0.1. EDIT: Ha, actually, drilling back further, looks like that's not true at all: Firefox's major release has surpassed IE9 for a while now. I was misled by IE9's slow adoption curve.
- sp332 14y ago
  Chrome auto-updates, so there are almost no users of old versions of Chrome. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-browser-usage-firefox-users-still-avoiding-updates/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-br...
  - mbrubeck 14y ago
    Well, about 12% of Chrome page views are from old versions so "almost no users" is a bit of a myth or exaggeration. But it's definitely a smaller proportion than other browsers. Firefox also auto-updates, but has a longer tail of users from old versions since it's been around longer and had a more obtrusive update process until recently. Currently about 32% of Firefox page views come from old versions, but this is decreasing steadily now that Firefox 3.6 users are being auto-updated to the current release channel, and now that updates are more "silent." Stats are based on http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206-201206-bar http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206... and http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201206-201206-bar http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201206-201206-...
    - sp332 14y ago
      SPDY has been around since Chrome 10, so only 5% of Chrome users are older than that.
      - Erunno 14y ago
        Once SPDYv3 is enabled in a release channel the Chrome installations which only support an outdated SPDY version will rise suddenly if the current update trend is not reversed in a future version.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
qeorge 14y ago
Note: if you're upgrading Firefox and you didn't have SPDY enabled already you'll have to enable it manually. (about:config, network.http.spdy.enabled = true)
- mbrubeck 14y ago
  This isn't true. If you had the pref set to the default value before, it should change to the new default value when you upgrade. [Note: I am a Firefox developer.]
  - qeorge 14y ago
    Maybe I should file a bug report then? [Note: I literally just downloaded it, upgraded, and had this experience.]
    - mbrubeck 14y ago
      Yes, that would be great!
    - jyap 14y ago
      Worked perfectly fine for me.
  - known 14y ago
    Ctrl + F displays number of instances found in a page in Chrome but not in Firefox. Can you please fix it.
    - Erunno 14y ago
      https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=257061 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=257061 The bug is 8 years old and nobody seems to be working on it. I wouldn't hold my breath that it will be fixed soon.
      - known 14y ago
0xABADC0DA 14y ago
Score one for mediocrity. Microsoft's Speed + Mobility version of Spdy has some good improvements, but I guess Google will just declare their version to be the standard. Also Spdy only had 23% faster page load times than non-pipelined HTTP (in other words, enabling networking.http.pipelining is just as good).
- mbrubeck 14y ago
  SPDY is not something that Google just implemented and froze as a standard. Mozilla and others are still working on the SPDY spec in the IETF, and we're happy to see improvements. Mike Belshe continues to work on evolving the SPDY protocol even though he no longer works for Google. The latest development builds of Chrome and Firefox have just been updated to SPDY draft3.
  - 0xABADC0DA 14y ago
    So speaking for Google, if IETF results in changes from Speed + Mobility then Google will commit to implement it? From what I can see the Spdy draft 3 doesn't include any improvements from Speed + Mobility so I don't see the relvance of your post. It's a shame because Speed + Mobility has real improvements (yes Microsoft does things right sometimes).
    - Erunno 14y ago
      SPDY is in a better position to dictate the development of HTTP 2.0 as there are already two independent implementation in the wild, unlike S+M which so far only exists as a concept paper AFAIK.
      - kristofferR 14y ago
        That's a shame, since S+M has the potential to become the true next-gen HTTP, an improvement for everyone, while SPDY only is useful for "the elite" websites who has purchased a SSL certificate. Most small websites with no need for SSL, unless they're hosted on a service like Tumblr or Webly, will be stuck on HTTP 1.1 "forever". It sucks that independently hosted "real" websites will have a technological disadvantage to websites hosted on third-party services unless they're willing to shell out a not insignificant amount of money ($15+ USD per year per site).
pbhjpbhj 14y ago
http://dev.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper http://dev.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper Lots of detail about SPDY for those like me who didn't know.

sp332 14y ago

Here's a tiny restartless addon that shows if the page you're on is using SPDY: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/spdy-indicator/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/spdy-indicato...

shmerl 14y ago
Thanks! That's useful.
sohn 14y ago
Give me examples of pages that have it

thomasnext 14y ago

Citation needed! What about users of old versions of Chrome, for example?

jevinskie 14y ago
Aren't Chrome users almost always using the latest version because of the auto-update by default?
- Erunno 14y ago
  Apparently not. There's an ever growing tail of users who get stuck with an outdated version [1]. It's not as bad as Firefox yet but surprising nonetheless given how much effort Google put into Chrome's update system. [1] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-browser-usage-firefox-users-still-avoiding-updates/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-br...
  - SquareWheel 14y ago
    Wow, those charts are fantastic.
  - alanh 14y ago
    I have personally experienced and seen Chrome get “stuck” and kind of just fail to update itself until a manual re-download of the installer is performed. It does usually work, but sometimes just stops. For example, I recently saw a bug report from someone who thought they were on the most recent version of Chrome — 10. (It’s currently at 19 or so.)
mbrubeck 14y ago
Chrome has had SPDY enabled for at least a year now -- since around Chrome 10, I think? And according to Statcounter measurements for this month to date [1], 28.75% of all page views currently come from Chrome 19. From the same Statcounter numbers, 17.27% of all page views are from Firefox 12. So that's over 46% of page views this month using the latest versions of Chrome and Firefox. And another few percent are just one or two versions behind. So a couple of months from now, 50% of page views measured by Statcounter should come from SPDY-enabled browsers, especially if IE marketshare keeps shrinking rapidly. [1] http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206-201206-bar http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206...
- kibwen 14y ago
  Also interesting: according to that graph, as of June 2012, Firefox's major stable release at last surpassed IE's major stable release--just a few months shy of the 10-year anniversary of the release of Firefox 0.1. EDIT: Ha, actually, drilling back further, looks like that's not true at all: Firefox's major release has surpassed IE9 for a while now. I was misled by IE9's slow adoption curve.
sp332 14y ago
Chrome auto-updates, so there are almost no users of old versions of Chrome. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-browser-usage-firefox-users-still-avoiding-updates/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/may-br...
- mbrubeck 14y ago
  Well, about 12% of Chrome page views are from old versions so "almost no users" is a bit of a myth or exaggeration. But it's definitely a smaller proportion than other browsers. Firefox also auto-updates, but has a longer tail of users from old versions since it's been around longer and had a more obtrusive update process until recently. Currently about 32% of Firefox page views come from old versions, but this is decreasing steadily now that Firefox 3.6 users are being auto-updated to the current release channel, and now that updates are more "silent." Stats are based on http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206-201206-bar http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201206... and http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201206-201206-bar http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201206-201206-...
  - sp332 14y ago
    SPDY has been around since Chrome 10, so only 5% of Chrome users are older than that.
    - Erunno 14y ago
      Once SPDYv3 is enabled in a release channel the Chrome installations which only support an outdated SPDY version will rise suddenly if the current update trend is not reversed in a future version.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

qeorge 14y ago

Note: if you're upgrading Firefox and you didn't have SPDY enabled already you'll have to enable it manually. (about:config, network.http.spdy.enabled = true)

mbrubeck 14y ago
This isn't true. If you had the pref set to the default value before, it should change to the new default value when you upgrade. [Note: I am a Firefox developer.]
- qeorge 14y ago
  Maybe I should file a bug report then? [Note: I literally just downloaded it, upgraded, and had this experience.]
  - mbrubeck 14y ago
    Yes, that would be great!
  - jyap 14y ago
    Worked perfectly fine for me.
- known 14y ago
  Ctrl + F displays number of instances found in a page in Chrome but not in Firefox. Can you please fix it.
  - Erunno 14y ago
    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=257061 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=257061 The bug is 8 years old and nobody seems to be working on it. I wouldn't hold my breath that it will be fixed soon.
    - known 14y ago

0xABADC0DA 14y ago

Score one for mediocrity. Microsoft's Speed + Mobility version of Spdy has some good improvements, but I guess Google will just declare their version to be the standard. Also Spdy only had 23% faster page load times than non-pipelined HTTP (in other words, enabling networking.http.pipelining is just as good).

mbrubeck 14y ago
SPDY is not something that Google just implemented and froze as a standard. Mozilla and others are still working on the SPDY spec in the IETF, and we're happy to see improvements. Mike Belshe continues to work on evolving the SPDY protocol even though he no longer works for Google. The latest development builds of Chrome and Firefox have just been updated to SPDY draft3.
- 0xABADC0DA 14y ago
  So speaking for Google, if IETF results in changes from Speed + Mobility then Google will commit to implement it? From what I can see the Spdy draft 3 doesn't include any improvements from Speed + Mobility so I don't see the relvance of your post. It's a shame because Speed + Mobility has real improvements (yes Microsoft does things right sometimes).
  - Erunno 14y ago
    SPDY is in a better position to dictate the development of HTTP 2.0 as there are already two independent implementation in the wild, unlike S+M which so far only exists as a concept paper AFAIK.
    - kristofferR 14y ago
      That's a shame, since S+M has the potential to become the true next-gen HTTP, an improvement for everyone, while SPDY only is useful for "the elite" websites who has purchased a SSL certificate. Most small websites with no need for SSL, unless they're hosted on a service like Tumblr or Webly, will be stuck on HTTP 1.1 "forever". It sucks that independently hosted "real" websites will have a technological disadvantage to websites hosted on third-party services unless they're willing to shell out a not insignificant amount of money ($15+ USD per year per site).

pbhjpbhj 14y ago

http://dev.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper http://dev.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper Lots of detail about SPDY for those like me who didn't know.