Agreed. The author's whole argument of not wanting "having to make these superficial changes again and again" doesn't make sense. There isn't any requirement for all code to follow the latest and greatest idioms. Rust guarantees backwards compatibility, and the author even acknowledges that in the article.
It would be pretty sad if the reason for no new features or syntax in Rust was due to programmers not wanting to feel like their code was no longer idiomatic.