Technology has made manufacturing, services, mass communication, and markets much more efficient. When they are efficient, competition creates fewer winners and the winners win big.
If you want to understand inequality understand that. This is fundamental economics. We can dream of a world where there are 1500 different brands of phone each having close to equal market share but when one gains advantage, the advantages multiply and you end up with one or two major phone manufacturers. Propping up the other ones is nice, and may do some local good, but it's Sisyphean - it won't change the dynamics.
I'm pro-capitalist (not least because it works) but also pro-market regulation, capitalism should be harnessed for the good of everyone not just a few.
"Postcapitalism is possible because of three major changes information technology has brought about in the past 25 years. First, it has reduced the need for work, blurred the edges between work and free time and loosened the relationship between work and wages. The coming wave of automation, currently stalled because our social infrastructure cannot bear the consequences, will hugely diminish the amount of work needed – not just to subsist but to provide a decent life for all.
Second, information is corroding the market’s ability to form prices correctly. That is because markets are based on scarcity while information is abundant. The system’s defence mechanism is to form monopolies – the giant tech companies – on a scale not seen in the past 200 years, yet they cannot last. By building business models and share valuations based on the capture and privatisation of all socially produced information, such firms are constructing a fragile corporate edifice at odds with the most basic need of humanity, which is to use ideas freely.
Third, we’re seeing the spontaneous rise of collaborative production: goods, services and organisations are appearing that no longer respond to the dictates of the market and the managerial hierarchy. The biggest information product in the world – Wikipedia – is made by volunteers for free, abolishing the encyclopedia business and depriving the advertising industry of an estimated $3bn a year in revenue."
If antitrust law were actually enforced suddenly all of this "efficient technology" would stop creating such big winners.
Almost every one I have worked in use haphazard methods, unnecessary manual input and duplication of input, outdated forecasting, bad choice of software tools (e.g. spreadsheet heavy) ... the list goes on of small day to day things that add up.
There was a recent story about 90% of people not even knowing about Ctrl-F to search documents.
Think about all the times you've had images sent in Word documents or crappy artwork you've had to re-create by hand because the only copy of the logo was a 400px jpg.
Multiply the time wasted on those things by a few hundred million.
Now tell me there's no productivity to find, and we haven't even got on to your actual business processes.
Multi-factor productivity (MFP) growth measures the growth of GDP over the combined contributions of total hours, workforce skills, machinery and structures and ICT capital.
From wikipedia  :
Multifactor productivity measures reflect output per unit of some combined set of inputs. A change in multifactor productivity reflects the change in output that cannot be accounted for by the change in combined inputs. As a result, multifactor productivity measures reflect the joint effects of many factors including new technologies, economies of scale, managerial skill, and changes in the organization of production.
It is clear that some firms are drastically less efficient than others though.
I'd be afraid to see the correlation between who uses those kinds of methods and who is at the frontier of productivity. I hope that other article isn't the future :(
So with just the info in the article i don't think it supports any particular conclusion without more information.