I don't think the blog post derides the value. Rather, it points out that, while fixing bugs is valuable to the dev (professional self-respect shipping quality products) and the user (obvious), the way software market works in practice is that it's not particularly valuable to the company - at least, not valuable enough to justify the expense. Speaking as someone with 20 years of software engineering experience, I think this is an accurate assessment of things. But at the same time you're absolutely correct that it doesn't make it okay, and it is actually detrimental to both users and developers for the aforementioned reasons.

But, well, this is capitalism for you - whatever is the most profitable thing to do is what gets done regardless of how not okay it really is. I think the question we should be asking is: if users hate using crappy buggy software, and devs hate writing it, but it still gets written, aren't our basic economic incentives clearly out of tune?