The main problem is that in order to claim something is "overrated", you have to have some idea of the "rating."
So perhaps most of the other commenters were enlightened and knew exactly what the benefits were.
Not me. Like (perhaps) the author, I thought sitting is really, really bad for you: for your heart, for your long term mobility, for your health. And that standing will alleviate these issues.
Under my model, it wasn't just that moving was good and not moving was bad. I thought that specifically sitting was the worst form of non-movement (over lying down and standing).
I can't tell you where I got this but I had read a lot of "sitting is the new smoking" type articles.
Now this author tells me that is not the case, and there was no proof of it being the case.
This is news to me. I had the correct "rating" for this article and it turns out I had "overrated" standing desks.
If you already know all this, then of course it was not "overrated" for you.
If you accept the premise, the headline and conclusion makes sense. Standing ISN'T a replacement for exercise. There are ways to stand that will cause independent medical issues in joints.
But, like you, I'm also dubious of the premise. While standing (or actually adjustable) desks are all the rage, I don't see an obsession over the concept approaching other overrated cults like crossfit, or keto.