...adopted by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) for "us"?
..typo but very telling... I suppose "we" wont be sued by Larry et al a few years down the road eh?
Google's SPDY (speedy) protocol has been adopted by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) for use in the forthcoming HTTP 2.0 standard. Google developed SPDY as part of its ongoing efforts to speed up the Web. While its work to do so isn't entirely altruistic – a faster web means more users doing more on Google – the …
Missing an "at least" or an "up to". A page like forbes.com articles would doubtless be halved. El Reg's simpler layout and such more like 15%.
Of course, that's in optimal cases. Nothing SPDY can do about latency introduced by must-load ad affiliate networks blocking page rendering, and not responding for ten seconds at a time.
Oh well, the reinvented tcp (but rigorously over HTTP - LOL!) as well. The problem with Google is they have no long term goal design for their products, including protocols. They need quick and dirty hacks to deliver something working asap. Google should be kept as much aways as possible from Internet protocols, unless we want an Internet built on ill-designed protocols just because Google needs something to make its ill-designed webapps work.
Opera has supported SPDY for at least two stable versions already. You get a nice little lightning icon colour itself when it's in use.
Yet again, the browser that has all this before the others doesn't even get a mention in preference to Amazon's Silk (which I had to go look up what the hell that was).
Are you saying that SPDY was in Opera before it was in Google's own web browser, Chrome?
As for "not allowing" Google to be involved in developing Internet standards - why on earth not? It's a big stakeholder with diverse content delivery needs (search, ads, video) and it has expert programmers and system analysts and designers on payroll, and anyway the standards body isn't going to approve some old rubbish just because Google puts it forward.
I only dread the SPDY-specific malware that is surely coming. If a server can send you files that you didn't request, that's just asking for an exploit to be invented.
But apparently SPDY is - still? - vulnerable.
I wonder if it's worth trying to use up the supply of cool names for Interent threats, such as putting a telephone return-call protocol on Windows 8 phones and calling it "NEMESIS". Then hackers will be faced with calling their cool new hacking technique something like "PIMPLE" or "BUTTHOLE" or "TWINKIE". And when they announce at hacker conference that that's what they're going to talk about, no one will come.