Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by HippoBaro 2654 days ago
The reason is that HTTP/2 will be short-lived. Most of its potential (protocol multiplexing, mainly) is wasted because it still runs over TCP/IP. HTTP/3 will correct that with QUIC. I think we can except HTTP/3 to really see widespread adoption. HTTP/1.1 will remain ubiquitous though because there's a gazillion box that only speaks that.
1 comments
pjmlp 2654 days ago
I doubt it, unless you are expecting those that are yet to bother switching to HTTP/2, to jump directly to HTTP/3.

The migration to IP6 shows how quick the industry is moving to new protocols.

link
usefulcat 2654 days ago
To the extent that HTTP/3 is faster/cheaper/better than its predecessors, it should allow ads to be served more cheaply. Combine that with support in the dominant browser (and why wouldn't they, after all they did basically invent it and they have a vested interest in serving ads efficiently) and I'd say HTTP/3 has a pretty good shot at success.
link
zzzcpan 2654 days ago
> To the extent that HTTP/3 is faster/cheaper/better

This is rather questionable assumption. For almost everyone in the world it's not faster/cheaper/better than HTTP/1.1, definitely not worthy enough to even bother with it. So, the only way it can get anywhere is if Google abuses its position and forces everyone to adopt it. Which they probably won't do for such a silly thing, they get more out of it by coming up with more useless mediocre "faster/cheaper/better" protocols HTTP/[4567], because this pressures competition to waste resources on that, instead of on something that can compete with Google.

link