It started out with this:
> Unlike the other Ethernet standards, 10GbE provides the only
> full-duplex, point-to-point links usable for connecting
> network switches.
There have been "full-duplex point-to-point links usable for connecting network switches" since the very first actual full-duplex switches. The first I remember was 100 Mbps, but I'm pretty sure people were doing full duplex links between switches before that.
When using pluggables (e.g. SFP) the type of cabling you can use depends on the type of pluggable, not the switch. The pluggable acts as a modularization boundary. There are of course things that would need a converter (using SC connectors with a SFP-only switch) but that's got nothing to do with the switch. The only other common plug is the 8P8C, and here you have to choose between Cat6, Cat6a and Cat7. Or whatever comes next. But still the switch doesn't care.
10GBASE-T also runs on plain Cat6, though only up to 55m. The article makes it sound like you need Cat6a or better.
MMF is more expensive than SMF, not the other way around as the article states. SM transceivers are more expensive to produce though, but they have steadily been getting cheaper over the years.
10GBASE-SR doesn't have "the smallest form-factor". It's not a physical specification. SFP+ is though, and most of the 10GBASE standards are implemented by SFP+ transceivers. (Not 10GBASE-T because of power requirements and similarly not some of the more exotic long range optics.)
In the table it says CX4 supports up to 20G. It doesn't for Ethernet, where it's only 4 x 3.125 Gbps signaling and an actual capacity of 10 Gbps. But then the table of course lists a lot of things that aren't Ethernet at all.
Recommending using MMF for new installs is probably somewhat a matter of taste, but since SM transceiver costs are way down and since SMF is much more future proof I would certainly recommend using that for new 10G installs over anything MMF.
While the article mentions 10GBASE-T many times is does not list the important disadvantage of power consumption. It has improved over the years but is still around 5-6W per port, compared to about 1W per port for SM LH/LX ("10km") transceivers.