Actually no. If you advertise in your headers that you support SPDY/HTTP2, they'll use it even if they are not using encrypted http in the first request. Anyone who hasn't updated their servers to support it can't honestly claim they care a lot about performance.
> It's still going to be awhile before it's worth it to sabotage older browser performance, even once sites update their servers.
It is already worth it really, particularly when you factor in mobile where performance is a bigger.
> And in the end, that'll just embolden sites to crust their pages with more analytics and trackers until the performance isn't any better.
Well, there is a natural equilibrium that we tend to arrive at, but at least 1st party trackers are so lightweight with SPDY as to be irrelevant. If you have one 16K image somewhere on the page, the overhead of loading 100 trackers will seem negligible (JavaScript might be another matter though ;-).
Actually no. If you advertise in your headers that you support SPDY/HTTP2, they'll use it even if they are not using encrypted http in the first request. Anyone who hasn't updated their servers to support it can't honestly claim they care a lot about performance.
> It's still going to be awhile before it's worth it to sabotage older browser performance, even once sites update their servers.
It is already worth it really, particularly when you factor in mobile where performance is a bigger.
> And in the end, that'll just embolden sites to crust their pages with more analytics and trackers until the performance isn't any better.
Well, there is a natural equilibrium that we tend to arrive at, but at least 1st party trackers are so lightweight with SPDY as to be irrelevant. If you have one 16K image somewhere on the page, the overhead of loading 100 trackers will seem negligible (JavaScript might be another matter though ;-).