Or...I was just pointing out some things that are objectively true, and that really don't matter to almost everybody.
JR
Modern digital cameras are limited by lens resolution and diffraction effects at all but near optimal apertures in almost all lenses except top-quality primes.
Any further arguing about resolution in full-frame SLR formats should frankly be limited to theory or rare situations in professional or technical photography.
However, as you go down to smaller lenses, this become even more pronounced, so your average consumer-grade camera is almost entirely lens limited, as i said above.
So.... given this... since resolution and contrast is almost entirely determined by the lens aperture in consumer-grade cameras, it's not until you get close to full-frame sensors that we're still pushing the sensor technology. This makes the digital vs film debate really relevant ONLY when talking about professional-grade lenses in sizes probably bigger than APS-C or larger.
The remainder of the discussion about format quality is in the lenses. Frankly, the iPhone sensor won't get better without better lenses, the same goes for most compact cameras. There might be a few lines of resolution or a stop or two of dynamic range and contrast to be found in technology improvements, but the remainder is tied up in the physics of matter and diffraction and is tied up in the quality of the material and manufacturing and (more importantly) the size of the aperture.
However, there is nothing I know of that is inherent in the concept of "SLR" with a moving reflex mirror that can't be overcome with technology.
So, while I agree with the original article that perhaps the "SLR" will go away, he appears to be arguing that we should consider ditching our current lenses because new mirrorless cameras will use smaller lenses. I am arguing that this is silly, unless you're willing to accept the trade-offs that comes with that (namely, being stuck at today's lower resolution and contrast, in exchange for portability).
That's great for amateurs, but as a professional, the author of this bit may find himself rethinking his position in a few years... or perhaps the system as it is now is adequate for his usage, which is just great, but his mythical "smaller, faster, higher resolution, better contrast" camera won't ever exist because it's physically impossible.