Feels like it needs a conclusion - if the method of designing websites doesn't work well for architecture, then what happens when you try and design a house lik

Feels like it needs a conclusion - if the method of designing websites doesn't work well for architecture, then what happens when you try and design a house like a website: what works surprisingly well, what leads to a less-than-optimal house or one that just feels wrong, etc? Does this demonstrate the author's original theory of the architecture flow of work being better, or does the beautiful house designed at the end of the article suggest that different workflows can still lead to a good product?