If you are Wired and you write an article “The Web is dead. Long live the Internet”, then you are bound to get people in the technology sector to read and respond to it.
It’s a crap title for a pretty lame article. Lamenting something is dead is very typical for tech media blogs and companies. A post either starts to claim something is dead or hot, in or out, right or wrong, black or white. It has the scent of trying to maximize traffic to the article on the Wired website, which is pretty ironic given the bold statement in it claiming that the web is dead.
I’m not going to bother analyzing and responding to everything in the post. Dave Winer has a nice list describing why the web is still very important (I love his point about Steve Jobs not having to approve anything we say on the web 😉 ). Gruber has an even shorter post about the quality of the Wired article and immediately nominates it for one of the worst Wired stories. And at Boing Boing it is noted that the presented data set doesn’t take into account that overall traffic has exploded.
One thing I did notice. The article on the Wired website is extremely hard to read for me. Try reading the article and not get lost somewhere. It’s probably “optimized” for apps. The web isn’t dead, but the Wired website will soon be “no longer needed”.
@vanelsas 
Lazy linkbait title I agree, but I found the ensuing debate between O’Reilly, Anderson and Battelle worth a look though?