[ScottBurson]

Except that a touch screen can't (reasonably) be optically coated to reduce reflected glare, because skin oils from fingerprints disable the effect, showing up as bright spots.

Those of us who are still bummed that we can't get a matte screen on a Mac laptop anymore will be triply upset if we can't even have an optical coating.

For the use cases of tablets/convertibles, it presumably doesn't matter so much, but for the more intensive creative work that laptops are better for, it does.

Okay -- Apple could have one touchscreen laptop model and leave the rest as they are, or make a touchscreen optional on the whole line. But I would never want to buy a touchscreen laptop.

[scholia]

How many have you bought? The last time I bought a non-touch laptop -- last year -- I quickly realised my mistake, took it back and paid more for one with a touch-screen.

Anything without a touch-screen just feels horribly broken and out of date now.

Otherwise I'm not sure what your complaint is. I see lots of people happily using touch screens for all sorts of purposes. That includes smartphones, tablets, convertibles, laptops and desktops.

I don't really see why something that works on screen sizes from 4-inches to 28 inches (Surface Studio) across multiple form factors should somehow not work on some particular device.

> the more intensive creative work that laptops are better for, it does.

Not sure what you mean, here. Laptops are less powerful than desktops and ergonomically inferior. They are not better for anything except moving around.