I think the problem with this article is pretty simple. Confirmation bias plus an unhealthy dose of Juvenoia. He admits in his update that the jobs he takes are

I think the problem with this article is pretty simple. Confirmation bias plus an unhealthy dose of Juvenoia. He admits in his update that the jobs he takes are cleaning up after projects that have already been recognized for their failures. He also reduces younger developers to a very basic strawman. He also doesn't appear to have recent experience being a developer that was involved with the first iteration of a project. Yes, things do get over complicated and need to be simplified later. There's always going to be someone getting over excited about using a new tool and insists on using it despite it being expensive and not meeting any additional requirements. The problem is his opinion is entirely based on hindsight and the fact he only gets work after that excited guy has either changed their mind or left. He also doesn't clearly see the potential benefits of some of these frameworks and architecture. He definitely doesn't get the very basic idea that proper architecture requires choosing solutions based on the business needs. A small simple we pages don't particularly benefit from from complex architecture. Purely offline desktop applications certainly don't benefit from using react native, especially if it's doing anything complicated. However, standardization of solution approaches across applications does have the benefit of making it much simpler to maintain any employee pool capable of continuing to develop and maintain their software. That's why when an internal tool is needed to manage semi complex data it's generally best to continue using Angular for the web ui and not suddenly decide to use Razor.