Obviously I don't know if the article is correct, but I think the argument is that actual programming tasks can't be split to satisfy the speed of future CPUs with 12 or more cores. No matter if software or hardware based scheduler is in charge. Basically, you will have cores idling because the program has not logically independent tasks (that is, tasks that can run in parallel) to provide.
Surely, IT analyst likes to say that everybody is making a mistake, and the actual paradigms will be obsolete in two weeks just to look smarter than the rest. That said, I am pretty sure MS, or one of the speedy-junkies-programmers will find the way.
That is if MS can distract their 10000 devs of their real job: to write security patches
PS: I realize engineers, philosophers, scientists of any kind, rock singers, and gamblers have a tendency to build inductive conclusions from just a few cases.