The problem with the test ... (Score 3, Informative)

IMHO, there is a huge issue with this test. On one hand its author claims : "However, when testing real world sites I did not see any such gains. In fact, my tests showed SPDY is only marginally faster than HTTPS and is slower than HTTP." But on the other hand at bottom lines it states : "This means SPDY doesn’t make a material difference for page load times, and more specifically does not offset the price of switching to SSL." SSL ? Wait a minute doc ... there is something wrong with the flux capacitor ! In fact to "SPDY"-fy the sites, the guy clarifies the technique he used : "For a proxy, I used the Cotendo CDN (recently acquired by Akamai). Cotendo was one of the early adopters of SPDY, has production-grade SPDY support and high performance servers. Cotendo was used in three modes – HTTP, HTTPS and SPDY (meaning HTTPS+SPDY)." You get it ? No, not the advertisement for cotendo ... ... He did not tested SPDY at all but tested TLS+SPDY !!! WTF ?!? Either the guy should upgrade all his article replacing SPDY with TLS+SPDY or he should trash it and make another one only with SPDY. Then we will start to discuss about some of his strange benchmark decision... Sad that such a odd article get so much press here :(