Sure, you can have deterministic concurrency. But that's not what he's talking about. Concurrent operations being non-deterministic is the accepted norm. If you're talking about deterministic concurrency, then you can qualify it as such; anything else is pedantry.
If someone is trying to be precise in what they talk about, pedantry is correct. The trouble I had with the author is that he is redefining what I understand by the term concurrency.
