I run a very modestly profitable website that gets about 1k visitors per day. I'm not even an "entry-level developer", I'm not a developer at all, with only the most rudimentary ability to kludge together a little JS and php.
I chose Wordpress for the site, even though it's not a blog. In fact, creating a system where posts weren't displayed in chronological order actually took a few hours of blindly hacking at various WP functions.
The reasons I chose Wordpress over an existing CMS:
* I already know how to use WP
* There is a vast array of FLOSS themes and plugins to meet virtually any need available
* Wordpress is well supported by shared hosting and managed VPS providers (through cpanel etc.)
* It's relatively easy to get free high-level support through IRC because so many people know WP
Most of these reasons are inertia based. It would be a vast undertaking to create a CMS version of Wordpress that actually gained traction because, awkward as WP is, it has an enormous library of free existing solutions to take on virtually any problem. This quality, which the author of the article complains about, it the same reason WP would be so hard to kill. Even if your product is better for a given purpose, people aren't going to give up the advantages of WP I outlined above just for an incremental improvement in UX or speed.