From the article: “The protocol is only useful for browsers and big services” This is sort of true. One of the primary drivers behind the http2 development is the fixing of HTTP pipelining. If your use case originally didn't have any need for pipelining then chances are http2 won't do a lot of good for you.

This may be a big issue, and may impact net neutrality. You get better performance if your stuff is inside a pipe from a Big Service. This makes Google look good. It also increases the relative benefit of running everything through a content delivery service.

This, in turn, creates a use case for CDNs which suck up all the components needed to display a page by whatever means necessary and deliver them to the end user over one HTTP2 connection. It then makes sense for the CDN, not the end user page, to be the advertising insertion point. If ads are loaded from a third-party ad server, they might not show up before the user is done viewing the page. This sometimes happens now. With server-side control of ordering within a single HTTP2 pipe, advertisers tied in with the CDN can be sure that ads will appear when the advertiser wants them to appear.

So there's a net neutrality issue. When multiple streams are multiplexed over a single pipe, the server gets to determine who goes first. Control over that order is valuable. That control may end up in the hands of the CDN, not the site operator.