You're right. But still: The statement in the article was to improve a condom.
My statement is that condoms are perfectly fine, but the psychological aspect is what's "broken". And you won't fix that simply by designing a better condom. The condom itself is what makes it unpleasurable for some men. Or how would you explain that some men lose their erection if they simply try to put a condom on?
You're reiterating the design ideas of the condom with a bit of expansion, asserting that it must be this way.
But you really don't know if you've explored the entire design-space.