I'M ARGUING AGAINST CONVENTIONAL WISDOM! PLEASE GIVE ME ATTENTION!
Use linked-lists in situations where you need fast insertion and lookup time isn't as important. Don't use linked-lists when lookup time is important. Don't make fallacious claims supported with misguided and incomplete examples.
> I'M ARGUING AGAINST CONVENTIONAL WISDOM! PLEASE GIVE ME ATTENTION!
I don't think it's like this, it's true that the article is a bit harsh, but it contains a lot of references that support the claim.
Additionally I also came to the conclusion that plain linked list are virtually always slower in practice because insertions in vector is amortized constant time, or because you can use better more local structures like deques, or because hash tables are always an option, and so on. Also check Soustrup's vector vs list slide in the presentation by linked by chmike's in this thread it's pretty demonstrative.
Use linked-lists in situations where you need fast insertion and lookup time isn't as important. Don't use linked-lists when lookup time is important. Don't make fallacious claims supported with misguided and incomplete examples.