The reason terminals are so useful is because they have greater usable information density than really any other interface. The article desperately misses this in its lead about the 2.3 megapixels of display space, and the presumed potential information content. But a terminal has quite a lot of information in it! Far more information--from a human usability POV--than the oversized icons this TermKit uses to adorn every small bit of textual information.
For example, on my MacBook Pro, using a pretty large font size, I run a 90x48 terminal (with multiple tabs, but that's a different issue). This terminal occupies approximately half of my display (sometimes I put another one next to it, though there's slight overlap at my screen size, font size, frame elements, dock/menu bar, etc). Now, as we can see using the 'calc' utility I wrote for systems I work on:
505-Documents % calc 90x48 # result on stdout, canonical form of expression on stderr
90x48
4320
Well, 4k-ish characters isn't that many positions (but it's not tiny already), but each of those characters might be any of approximately 256 values. Saying exactly how many it is is a little tricky though. Many of my tools (e.g. the bash prompt itself, ls, less with lesspipe, vim, etc) colorize output, making for multiple easy distinguishable ways the letter 'A' might appear. On the other hand, while high-bit characters are not generally usefully or frequently displayed, modern terminals *do* display many thousands of Unicode characters potentially. So as an approximation, we might say that there are approximately 1.1M easily distinguishable states of my terminal. I know, of course, that, most of the time most of the characters that display are along the left edge of my terminal, and the right side is largely blank. But nonetheless, there are at least a couple 100k states that are both plausible and importantly EASILY distinguishable... not *instantly* distinguishable, of course. Obviously, my eyes need to flit back and forth a while to compare, say, the file sizes and permissions of a bunch of things that show up in an 'ls -l' display. But it is still at least an order of magnitude more information than I'd discern with equal ease using TermKit (or, say, using a GUI file manager like Finder) to look at the same 'ls -l' directory.
Obviously, the theoretical information content of a high-res display is enormous. If I even have a 16-bit display, running somewhere over 1.5 megapixels (my screen is apparently slightly lower res than Steve Wittens') that's something like... well, more than the number of particles in the universe, possible states (e.g. (2**16)**(1680*1050)). But in fact, as a human, I really can't meaningfully distinguish nearly any of those states. I can't even *see* individual pixels, nor distinguish very close colors very well. But even within my actual perceptual threshold, I cannot give direct meaning to a slight color difference in some small part of the GUI screen, except in very broad categories that contain a few bits of information each. My recognition and discernment of the meaning of *characters* of my native language is far greater than some other graphical abstraction.