Authors use some vague and unconvincing arguments about deficiencies of well established tool (shell) in academic research to boost relevance of their obscure r

Authors use some vague and unconvincing arguments about deficiencies of well established tool (shell) in academic research to boost relevance of their obscure research (formal methods and performance of shell regarding multiprocessing). Without giving details of their work in the paper! Just tell me the damn problem your tool solves regarding unix shell programming and why it's cool. Don't waste our time with "rehabilitating shell" in academia.