Marketing guff???
"All the "type 1" and "type 2 hypervisor" stuff is marketing guff"
What? In what way is it supposed to be just marketing guff? There are clear, major and well defined differences between the two. One runs the hypervisor directly on the hardware, with all VMs running on top of that including the management OS so there's minimal overhead between the OS and hardware. The other runs the hypervisor on top of the existing OS, with all VMs running on top of that, so all VMs have to communicate with the hardware via not only the hypervisor but also the management OS, and are also reliant on the management OS not having any issues.
Perhaps a petty point, but when such a massive error is made with something I do know about, I wonder how many errors are in the rest of the article on topics I don't know about.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
