That wasn't my argument, the statement you are attributing to me is obviously false since my banana doesn't run Photoshop and it's not a PC. My statement is in

That wasn't my argument, the statement you are attributing to me is obviously false since my banana doesn't run Photoshop and it's not a PC. My statement is in response to the claim 'Surface is not a PC because it won't have Photoshop on it'; I do not think that is a compelling argument. My statement isn't trying to go all the way to say that WinRT is a Desktop replacement, it's merely that single argument shouldn't lead you to the conclusion that it isn't. That WinRT itself won't have Photoshop on it is probably already false if the platform succeeds at all (there is already a reduced version of Adobe Photoshop for iPad, Adobe would make a less-reduced version for RT if the demand is there and the hardware supports it). Even assuming it is, lack of Adobe Photoshop doesn't automatically make something not a viable desktop replacement for 99.9% of people. It looks like they are pushing Surface as something to be used with a keyboard (at least more so that iPad). That seems like a reasonable thing to call out in marketing as why this device might be able to replace the desktop for some users when an iPad fell short. Any new version of anything is going to leave out some percentage of the users unless it is a strict superset of the old functionality. Apple Maps are totally useless to anyone who only used Google Maps for public transit. It's totally ridiculous to make the claim that Apple Maps isn't a viable replacement for Google Maps based solely on the fact that for a specific fairly small set of users it isn't a viable option; Apple Maps is still a viable replacement for the vast majority of users.