So I will keep commenting that it isn't just about technical issues and it isn't just about organizational ones, and you must look at both to really understand what is going on.
But I probably did get a little too excited that a technical post acknowledged and made it an important point in their article.
Microservices have been from the start an organizational tool, with reliability and the ability to scale horizontally to avoid constraints of vertical scaling trailing at second place.
The rationale is that the first bottleneck that is hit by a growing organization is developer's throughput (i.e., the ability to deploy bugfixes and features without hitting blockers due to multiple teams being affected by a changeset). After that point, a service has to grow a tad more until reaching a point where the requests bounded to a subset of features justifies peeling them out to independent services.
However, microservices can also serve actual technical purposes too. But the nuances of accepting two viewpoints often placed in juxtaposition to one another is not internet friendly. Microservices, service oriented architecture, whatever you call it depends on your level of cynicism i suppose (or optimism?).