> Okay so after all that we get to the root of the issue. Instead of a good traditional desktop experience, you want to provide a mediocre desktop/touch hybrid experience. Instead of doing one thing well, the aim is to do multiple things poorly.
No need to get disparaging here. Clearly we don't want to provide a "mediocre" experience, nor do I think we do.
I also don't agree that supporting touch is some sort of hybrid experience these days. We aren't trying to be a mobile platform. We aren't trying to be a phone platform. Peoples traditional desktops (including many home workstations) have touch. These are real desktops bought by real people who get real work done.
I always disliked the huge buttons that come by default with some desktop environments, and I'm amazed the argument is "people use touch". As far as I and everyone around me is concerned, no they don't.
If it's an accessibility issue, it should be an optional solution for those who need it, not the default.
>Many of us may not particularly like touch screens, but an incredible number of computers that run Linux/BSD these days have touch screens. Things should work out of the box for these computers whether or not you want one.
Okay so after all that we get to the root of the issue. Instead of a good traditional desktop experience, you want to provide a mediocre desktop/touch hybrid experience. Instead of doing one thing well, the aim is to do multiple things poorly.