If someone asked me how to "speed up the web", I would not suggest "use HTTP/2".
I would remove ads and other garbage. As a decades long non-popular browser and TCP client user, I can testify this works very effectively. I prefer to have full control over the resources that I request, whether text or binary, so no auto-loading resources, no Javascript-requested resources and no HTTP/2 "server push". The clients I use do not auto-load resources, run Javascript nor carry out "server push". Works great for me. Web is not slow.
According to HTTP/2 proponents, the protocol originated at an online advertising services company and was developed by companies that profit from sale and delivery of online advertising, HTTP/2 was designed to "speed up the web".
I respect that opinions on HTTP/2 may differ. If someone loves HTTP/2, then I respect that opinion. In return I ask that others respect opinions that may differ from their own, including mine. NB. This comment speaks only for the web user submitting it. It does not speak for other web users. IMHO, no HN commenter can speak for other web users either. Thank you.
I would say that a text-only experience is valid I don't think it's how the majority of people want to use the web. Users want a rich multimedia experience.
If HTTP/2 speeds up a rich multimedia web experience then it may legitimately be one way to "speed up the web" for someone who expects that level of experience.
I don't think it's fair to criticize a protocol for who designed it. The specification is out there for anyone to interpret and if there is specific complaint in it's design then make that.
HTTP/3 is now the version to upgrade to. We're in Google cloud so we've been running that for some time now without issues. Works great actually.
I don't get all this anti HTTP 2 & 3 sentiment on hacker news. What's wrong with people here? HTTP 1.1 is a quarter century old at this point. This sounds just like a bunch of grumpy old men arguing against progress. Time to move on. Yes HTTP/1.1 works. But it's also a bit limited and slow in various ways that both new HTTP variants address. One little bug in nginx is not going to change anything. Bugs happen all the time. They get fixed and people move on. I'm not hearing a lot of rational arguments here.
According to HTTP/2 proponents, the protocol originated at an online advertising services company and was developed by companies that profit from sale and delivery of online advertising, HTTP/2 was designed to "speed up the web".
I respect that opinions on HTTP/2 may differ. If someone loves HTTP/2, then I respect that opinion. In return I ask that others respect opinions that may differ from their own, including mine. NB. This comment speaks only for the web user submitting it. It does not speak for other web users. IMHO, no HN commenter can speak for other web users either. Thank you.