Nonsense. I'll believe it when I see it. The article simply extols the technical superiority that Dolby Atmos has over stereo. I don't think anyone in their right mind would try to argue that it's not technically superior, but if you think that's all it takes to "definitely" supersede stereo, you are a fool. The closest we got was with SACD with it's superior bitrate, frequency, and 6-channel, and even that was a complete failure. In an age where most people listen to music with stereo earbuds, and even at home, people are content with shitty sound bars they think are worthy of showing off, stereo is what you're going to get. The only people experiencing Dolby Atmos are home cinema enthusiasts (no not for the vast majority of people who watch their movies on Netflix. I'm talking about the crowd still buying Ultra HD Blu-rays), and people who hear it in a movie theater. That's about it. Until the hardware is ubiquitous and the general people's mindsets change, we're only going backwards, not forwards on that front. Stereo will be here for a LONG time as far as I can see.