Could it be that this is an innocent mistake or a bug in the way that Google servers are sending HTTP. Chrome wouldn't be affected as it will be using SPDY for all Google services. As soon as Chrome switched back to the Firefox user agent it started using HTTP again and the same bug was found.
Besides, this just doesn't make sense. If this was an attempt to make Firefox look bad then it's a dreadful one. This just serves to make Google services look faulty as Firefox will still work for everything else. Because of this I doubt there is any malice behind this and it is just a bug.
I wonder if that's what this is though: Ubuntu LTS having modified the FF build they run to use SPDY by default (given the LTS is supposed to be out for 5 years now, they may have chosen to jump the gun on that feature), and the SPDY support in the bundled FF isn't complete?
Every time a company is acquired, they say the same thing about how their larger parent is going to bring them greater resources and distribution. In reality, almost every company experiences the exact opposite effect. The early adopters and passionate base often leave and the company wallows in the murk of bureaucratic org charts.
I think the stories of what happens a few years after the acquisition are much more informative. Given their involvement in the Ruby on Rails community, I'm sure within 3 years we'll see this story show up as a 37signals Exit Interview.
There are notable exceptions. Heroku is still shipping awesome new stuff at a rapid clip under their Salesforce overlords. I don't know directly, but the plan at acquisition time was that they would stay pretty independent. I would guess that that helps a lot.
I think Pivotal could be one of those. Him saying "same services" suggests that EMC isn't planning on absorbing the team into something else. It helps that Pivotal is (presumably) very profitable, so there's value to leaving it alone instead of just viewing it as a source of a ton of great devs.
If it's still really Pivotal, and it just happens to be owned by EMC, they might fade much slower than the "everyone leaves within a year and a half" that we've seen so many times.
There are notable exceptions, but in every case of acquisition in the enterprise software space, the PR after the acquisition will always say things will remain the same, it will remain a standalone subsidiary.
But thing usually change, quickly, within a year or two.
There are exceptions, but only as an anomaly. Also, that doesn't really get at what's wrong with each of these exiting thoughts. Did Heroku keep shipping as a result or in spite of selling their company?
I'm not arguing against the practice of acquisitions. However, when a HUGE company buys a small team (famous for agile development) I find it hard to believe statements arguing that more resources are going to lead to "increased velocity".
Of course there are exceptions. Reddit is a pretty good one of the parent not killing the acquisition. Although it's spun out again. It definitely grew immensely under Conde Nast and wasn't quashed.
Besides, this just doesn't make sense. If this was an attempt to make Firefox look bad then it's a dreadful one. This just serves to make Google services look faulty as Firefox will still work for everything else. Because of this I doubt there is any malice behind this and it is just a bug.