It's a strangely/poorly written article. I've read it a couple of times and am still not 100% clear what the author is trying to say.

As best I can tell, the author is saying that it's unrealistic to expect that a vibecoded photoshop would YET exist since just because you can use AI to help doesn't make the task much easier or quicker. If this is the right take, then I guess he's really talking about AI-assisted development (i.e. AI coding used as a tool by a human developer), rather than "vibe coding" in the sense of "here's some specs - write this for me". With AI as a coding tool, then all the hard work is still left to the human - coding it up once you've specced and designed it was never the hard part.

With Karpathy-style vibe coding - just tell the AI what you want it to build - it's either going to succeed fast or fail fast, so "where is the vibecoded Photoshop" is then a reasonable question, albeit a rhetorical one, reflecting that this type of "gimme X" vibecoding isn't able to produce something of that nature, so of course if doesn't exist.

Yeah it has a confusing clickbait title that gives the wrong impression of what the article is about. His point is that the bottleneck to making a complex app like photoshop is architectural rather than just writing basic code… and he argues the LLMs don’t magically make the architectural part easier.