At least from my perspective, this comparison provides some information which, like pretty much all information, has varying levels of utility for each individual. For someone recording grand piano or quiet nature ambiances, this comparison probably doesn't provide much information that's useful to them. For someone recording loud amplified music, this comparison may provide some very useful information. Also, it necessarily follows that the latter group may have little interest in the criteria that are important to the former group, and vice versa. Even these general statements likely won't apply to some on here (they are generalities, after all). Maybe someone records very loud music from a PA but places great importance on differences between recorders that are only audibly discernible in a setting like recording a grand piano. Of course there's nothing wrong with that. As they say, "hike your own hike." The same general concept applies to what happens with the playback of the recording. Maybe someone is more interested in how the recording sounds through $20 earbuds than through a $50,000+ stereo system (or, again, vice versa). At least in my opinion there's nothing objectively wrong with either perspective. The information is here and it's up to each of us to decide how useful it is and how we apply it (or don't, which is also fine!) to our decision-making processes.
Maybe I've gone off the rails a bit with pontificating, and likely I haven't conveyed any new or unique ideas. I just wanted to throw my two cents in about some things that have been touched on in my interpretation of some of this thread.