Funny that the same issue has an article on how M2M is giving way to IoT:
Now, IoT does split the whole thing into 'dumb pipe' and some value-added services, where telecom companies have to compete on even terms with everyone else---and telecom companies don't have the best track record in this area. As a random example, Verizon has an app, MyVerizon, that is supposed to be a service portal for their cellular customers. The app is atrocious and is universally panned by users.
In the article you referenced, the author distinguishes M2M from IoT largely on the basis of the types of networks they connect to -- cellular for M2M vs. something new for IoT.
In that sense, both articles seem to be saying much the same thing -- that the cellular networks are not optimal, either technically or economically, for the billions of "things" that will be communicating with each other, without human involvement, in the coming years.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.