In the author's defense, I came to the same conclusion using Dvorak when I was a teenager learning unix and programming. I switched back to QWERTY for a while, but around 8 years ago I learned about Colemak and switched and have been very happy with it since.
One thing I like about Colemak is that it is close enough to QWERTY that I can still type on QWERTY by looking at the keys and not look like a complete fool. Dvorak is so different that it completely rewires the brain and it's very difficult to switch between it and QWERTY. That's been my experience at least.
After switching back and forth between Dvorak and QWERTY for multi-hour work sessions maybe three times I found that I could do so instantly. I learned touch typing on QWERTY very young so maybe this is why it was easy for me. I often use a keyboard without any labels on the keys so it's always touch typing no matter the layout I pick. Also, I don't really get anxious about things that slow down my text entry, so I tolerated my own interface experiments without worry. I've coded and done data analysis using my thumbs on a cell phone. Switching keyboard layouts really isn't so bad by comparison. To each their own.
I find it surprising that much of the current effort in keyboard layouts is in finding things that are better than QWERTY but similar enough to it to not be scary. I am completely unmotivated by this. If someone could convince me that their layout was a kind of super-Dvorak, and scientifically enhanced the same features that I enjoy about it then I would try it out in a heartbeat.
One thing I like about Colemak is that it is close enough to QWERTY that I can still type on QWERTY by looking at the keys and not look like a complete fool. Dvorak is so different that it completely rewires the brain and it's very difficult to switch between it and QWERTY. That's been my experience at least.