He's right
The surprising thing that Next made myself and many of my gaming buddies realize is that what we like about D&D is not a complex rules system, but rather the freedom that arises from it polar opposite, simplicity.
Or you could call it, rules terseness. If you can accomplish more with less rules, that's better. Less is more.
5th edition scrubbed off a lot of non-essential cruft out of the system. A lean, mean, fighting machine. I don't even think there will be much room for edition warring after a while, everyone including pathfinder players will eventually migrate over. Simple, streamlined rules with better melee / caster balance but not to the straight-jacket extent that 4th ed took it. 3rd and 4th were definitely going towards ever-increasing levels of complexity and that only benefits a minority of D&D players who are interested in system mastery, I agree with this article so much. I enjoy system mastery myself, but once you master it, you are left at the pinnacle where your teammates, and worse, your DM, cannot keep up. In a simpler system with fewer rules, and rules that both make more sense and have less exceptions and wonky interactions, you have more time to spend enjoying the game itself rather than the rules minutiae (or hating them). A vanilla human warrior, for example, is not something to be trifled with in this game.
Less rules means less rules to hate. If your DM is good, D&D 5th edition will allow players a lot more freedom. All kinds of things, like being able to move attack move, attack the same or different targets after you kill one and still have another attack left but the other target is ten feet away, are simply impossible in both 3rd ed and 4th. Even 2nd, if I recall correctly, had a lot of limitations on when you could benefit from those extra attacks. I've never seen a character in 3rd ed, for example, bother spending the feats to do spring attack. Now all characters (and monsters) have it for free, as they always should have had. The game is far more dynamic than it used to be.
It's like that quote from Lincoln, and the other by Mark Twain about how it's easier to write a long speech or letter than a short one ring true to me. It's easier to write a lot of rules that interact with one another, than to boil down complex behavior into simple rules that convey the same thing.
“I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead.” -Mark Twain.
I'd be so chuffed if I could be a play tester though. That'd be so cool. 
