I'm assuming your site is working for you (or you'd change it?) because that site isn't responsive.
I agree with the challenging part. I will tell you a specific example:
There are monitors with SO MUCH variation in resolutions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions
And the ratio of the time invested in beautifying your website, to the quality of usability that improves is almost negligible.
When the majority of the internet has progressed to better resolutions, please write the article again and I will gladly agree with you.
Having had many companies hire me and my company to "beautify" their site for the sake of usability and performance, and subsequently measuring the improvement, my response would be that you just haven't run into the situation yet.
Additionally, history on the web tells us that hardware likely won't standardize on any resolutions in the near future, which is the problem that RWD is intended to solve. The problem exists now and the solution exists now. All that's standing in your way is learning how to implement RWD correctly and efficiently.
Here's a few links to get you started: http://www.jannahagan.com/2012/05/responsive-web-design-reso...
>>You don't need any examples from me. Just take Apple's homepage. It isn't responsive yet, so, if it is still a usability nightmare, would you still be buying their products?
WORST ANALOGY EVER.
I just love it when people invoke the, "Well, if Apple doesn't do it, then no one else should." As if Apple has some divine knowledge on web design and user experience.
RWD does set a higher bar for implementation, but isn't that the point? That we challenge ourselves to be better?
The goal of the article was to help the guy at the top, the CEO, to understand that the investment into better implementation is worth it.