I'm sorry, but this article is just stupid. Let's step back just a second and try, just try a little tiny bit, to read between the lines and actually comprehend what Page said instead of hearing what you want to hear/are too incompetent to understand.
Lets assume for a moment that Page was being honest when he made that comment, that email is inefficient. Let's also assume that Page, like most people in any sort of tech field, is not the best communicator. Finally let's assume that, just for the time being, Page isn't a ego-maniacal man trying to take Jobs' place in the tech industry.
With all those assumptions firmly in place, let's look at his comment, quoted from a third party: "He does not much like e-mail either — even his own Gmail — saying the tedious back-and-forth takes too long to solve problems."
So then, Page believes that emailing is "tedious" and that it "takes too long to solve problems". Looking at those opinions, I don't see anything particularly wrong with either of them. Let's look at the alternatives to email, shall we?
Phone Conversations: Real time phone conversations allow for very rapid transferal of ideas as the average speed that a human speaks is approximately 120 words a minute. Comprehension rates is approximately 600-800 words a minute. However you run the risk of missing the other person when you call
Text Messages: Very short, often misspelled or a abbreviated text, creating an abundant amount of opportunity for miscommunication. There is often also a time delay between replies, sometimes a significant one.
Video conferencing: Same as phone conversations, only with the added benefit of video to communicate ideas, allowing for diagrams, flow charts, and more. Usually this requires an extensive level of preparation before being truly feasible.
Face to face: Even better than phone and video conferencing because it allows for improvisation, non-verbal communication, and physical interaction. Requires proximity to the other person
Now, of those options (I may have left a couple out) Email is closest to text messaging. If you send an email, you may not get a reply quickly enough for your needs. If you send an email you will ensure that a series of responses and replies will follow before a complex concept is conveyed fully. If something is miscommunicated, it may take several replies to find the flaw in understanding and rectify it.
This process of extensive reply and response can take hours, especially if you aren't a fast typer. Some would define that as "tedious".
This method of communication can become a problem when you are trying to brainstorm a difficult problem like, oh I don't know, maybe optimizing Android for lower spec hardware. It can also cause a problem when you attempt to do this with more than two people, as a person can reply to one person and the others will have no idea what they said, requiring those two people to explain it to the rest.
This method of communicating would therefore take significantly longer than a phone or video conference and much much longer than a face to face visit. It could be said that it "takes too long to solve problems" using this method.
Page is likely thinking like an engineer or at the very least a businessman. He sees the fact that attempting to do one task using email vs one of the other methods is foolish.
TLDR: The article is very, very stupid because the author Ross took absolutely no time to try and understand the intent of the comment and simple went ahead and interpreted the comment how they wanted to, going into a longwinded rant about how Page was trying to be the new Steve Jobs.
If this were an internet forum post, I'd probably call the author a troll for making such a stupid comment. Kind of pathetic really...