[nickzarzycki]

>the deletions and insertions in track are just as visually simple as on paper

This really is an aesthetic claim you're making, and it goes against what many in publishing feel, which is that substantial edits through track changes are clearly more taxing, less comfortable, less intuitive and uglier than paper.

You're also confusing collaboration problems with editorial workflow problems. The author is writing from a copy editor's standpoint, which involves producing clean, professional quality copy through a vertical, step-by-step editorial process.