I agree with most of your points, the article gets it backwards in lots of ways. The worse solution generally comes first, it's worse because it was 'quick and

I agree with most of your points, the article gets it backwards in lots of ways. The worse solution generally comes first, it's worse because it was 'quick and dirty' and didn't try to elegantly and optimally solve the problem. The worse solution generally is actually worse in some significant ways, but these defects are small compared to the advantage of being a solution that is available much earlier and conceptually simple enough for users to successfully apply without lots of training and false starts. Balloon framing is so easy that you can watch a video and then go do it, it requires simpler tools, cheaper lumber, and much less precision. There's no working worse-is-better analogy here, which is why nobody uses post-and-beam framing for anything outside of niche luxury homes. It's not better in any way other than looking older.