| Ok, I have to ask... With the amount of bandwidth available increasing, do we really need a new protocol to speed up web browsing? It would seem that as the speed of the connections to the network increases, the necessity of this protocol wanes. Additionally, with the option of simply tuning how your browser uses the network, you could probably achieve similar speed increases without needing a new protocol.
--
Kilroy was here |
|
|
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by NetAdmin1:With the amount of bandwidth available increasing, do we really need a new protocol to speed up web browsing? It would seem that as the speed of the connections to the network increases, the necessity of this protocol wanes. Additionally, with the option of simply tuning how your browser uses the network, you could probably achieve similar speed increases without needing a new protocol. Good points. This page took .719 secs to load(based on Fasterfox add-on's timer). Will I actually notice or care if the page loaded in .35 secs?
Rather than some noticeable improvements for end users, this may be more about cutting down on the number of bytes delivered by Google's servers(header compression, etc). They are always looking for efficiencies(no matter how incrementally small) to cut down their costs. Even small efficiencies become huge when measured against how much data Google moves daily.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
|
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| reply to NetAdmin1
Browser tuning is one thing, but SPDY sounds like it better takes advantage of whatever internet connection you have. Home connections aren't perfect, and realistically any increase in effective bandwidth (via compression or other peans) will result in a better web experience. There are some websites that still don't load with alacrity (triple word score!!!1!) on my 22/5 Comcast connection that a tuned browser and a hot protocol could fix. |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to NetAdmin1
said by NetAdmin1:With the amount of bandwidth available increasing, do we really need a new protocol to speed up web browsing? If you're on dial-up I'm sure you would |
|
 ModusI hate smartassery on forumsPremium
join:2005-05-02
us | Took the words right out of my mouth....we all seem to forget our fellow americans that are not on broadband 
--
Think Ahead. Learn More. Solve Now! |
|
| reply to BF69
Not just dialup. Look at the limited bandwidth of the sat services and mobile networks, not to mention people in developing countries. After all, the Internet extends far beyond industrialized nations.
Also, bandwidth usage is often highest when people need critical information, so anything you can do to increase the number of users who can access a Web site can count in those situations. |
|
1 edit | reply to BF69
said by BF69:If you're on dial-up I'm sure you would At that speed, a new protocol isn't enough to mitigate the two-fold problem of the high latency's effects on TCP and the low bandwidth. At some point you get slow enough that the connection itself is your main limiting factor.
--
Kilroy was here |
|
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:Browser tuning is one thing, but SPDY sounds like it better takes advantage of whatever internet connection you have. Home connections aren't perfect, and realistically any increase in effective bandwidth (via compression or other peans) will result in a better web experience. There are some websites that still don't load with alacrity (triple word score!!!1!) on my 22/5 Comcast connection that a tuned browser and a hot protocol could fix. First, nice use of the word alacrity. Now put down the thesaurus. 
Ok, so SPDY takes advantage of the connection you have, but how much of the load time can be attributed to the connection? What about the effects of an overloaded or underpowered web server or database server (for dynamic sites)? What about the effects of the local client system that is running poorly?
So many factors affect the perception of browsing speed that a new protocol seems to have its limits.
--
Kilroy was here |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Of course it has limits, however on a slower connection (which a lot of folks are on, believe it or not) page transmission time is a big factor, and the assumption is that the browser is highly tuned to start with.
It's not a panacaea by any stretch but every little bit helps, especially when you're running a high-traffic site. I have a feeling the protocol is relatively light (but still smart) so Google is able to serve up stuff more efficiently on their end as well. That fact is also why I don't think this project will go by the wayside...it's in Google's interest to make the Internet as efficient as possible. Gets them lower costs and more page views. |
|
 SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | reply to iansltx
Were you thinking of GoDaddy.com? |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | My host? No, it's »mddhosting.com. I don't host anything on GoDaddy, including domain names. Those are over at name.com, 1&1 or domain.com. |
|
