The introduction of the mouse led to developers paying less attention to keyboard shortcuts and function keys, but I don’t see anyone seriously saying computers should not have mice.

Or for that matter, that adding support for game controllers (something that has actually happened with Linux desktops) would led to curtailed development of non-controller parts.

Have you found some kind of performance or other detriment of the mere support of touch screens or is this just theoretical?

But even an half-way experience is an improvement for a feature that costs nearly zero dollars to include.

One of the most common actions among all computer users, zooming and centering a photo, is easier with a touch screen.

Even adding just that one thing is worth having a touch screen for.

Another example: working in the iOS simulator is now way easier because you can touch your apps that you're developing for iOS and iPadOS. And, by the way, macOS can run iOS/iPadOS apps directly from the App Store, so if there's something you really want to run that you just can't find a macOS equivalent for, there you go, you can just do it and interact with the app more naturally.

The touchscreen laptops I have seen last years are just normal windows laptops that happen to have a touchscreen, which I assume is what you refer to as "half way experience". How are you supposed to use it any differently anyway when you cannot actually turn it into a tablet anyway by separating screen and keyboard? And my impression was not that anybody was unhappy anyway.

The only touchscreen laptop I ever understood the appeal of was that one Lenovo one where you can fold the bottom back to make it a literal tablet or prop up as a kickstand.

The value of “tablet mode” would mainly be if I want to do content consumption, like watch video or read a book, while on the couch or in bed since it allows a wider range of postures you can sit or lay in when you don’t have to rest it on a flat surface.

If you can’t fold it back I just don’t get the appeal.