That link talks about analysis, but not evaluation. So not seeing his quote in context, it is difficult to comment.
In general I would say evaluation is of a specific position. So after every move you look at material, king safety, pawn structure, etc. for each player and evaluate who sits best. When a computer does this, it attaches a number to its evaluation; the +0.5 or -2.3 type thing I'm sure you've seen.
Analysis is going through a game and looking for improvement. Finding tactical opportunities you missed in the game, playing through variations you didn't have time to calculate out during the game, etc. That is why in the link Pruess says it is cheap and easy to ask a computer to analyse, but you don't learn anything from the "?" or "!!" it may place after a move, if you don't understand the position, concept, or whatever caused the particular move to be good or bad. Better to think for yourself or pay a good coach to guide your thinking.
That's my view anyway. I wrote about how I analyse my own games here, in case you are interested: http://becomingachessmaster.com/2015/05/09/how-to-analyse-and-annotate-your-chess-games/
David Pruess once listed you can become a better chess analyst and a better chess evaluator. Does anyone know the difference between the two?
http://danheisman.home.comcast.net/~danheisman/Lessons/zadult_guide3.html#Preuss