I wouldn't call quanta overhyped. Implications are at best embellished very modestly for entertainment purposes, but they do a very good job of staying true to the original paper and communicating some of the main ideas in a less-dumbed-down version than SA, and less ridiculously inaccurate/overhyped way than say physorg.
Maybe the physics/math editor/writers are better than the biology. I don't read the bio articles, so I can't comment directly about them. I just read the compsci/physics/math and they're not that bad.