Taking all things into consideration, I don’t believe any sound technology since 1959 is “better” than any other. Fidelity to source is not the determining factor of merit, it’s the listener’s experience.
As typographers with so much love for letterpress printing, shouldn’t we be appreciative of vinyl? After all, merely reproducing a source perfectly, as high res offset printing from digital files does, with every instance of a glyph identical, is a cold fish.
It’s not absolute, but a matter of taste. As Bodoni said, there was something wonderful in the skill and technical perfection which could render every serif identically—at least there was, 200 years ago.
So to answer your OP Ray, it’s a poor analogy. Comparing one font format to another, within the digital medium, in terms of vinyl vs. digital, doesn’t make as much sense as the obvious comparison involving vinyl— between analogue and digital.
However, the analogy might have meant that Windows PostScript was a loser format, because prior to OpenType, it was TrueType for Windows and PostScript for Mac that were the dominant formats. But even that doesn’t support the analogy, because vinyl has never become obsolete and is currently bouncing back.
Therefore, Windows PostScript was the Betamax of font formats.