Just looking at http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/ shows that's not true:
http://images.apple.com/v/macbook-pro/j/images/overview/touc...
Maybe wait to actually use one before trying to rally the mob with pitchforks and torches?
http://images.apple.com/v/macbook-pro/j/images/overview/touc...
Maybe wait to actually use one before trying to rally the mob with pitchforks and torches?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_key
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_keyboard
I personally don't feel the need to be that pedantic — since I've used both good touchscreen keyboards and wretched hardware, I'd prefer to focus on the quality of any specific implementation rather than philosophical debates about the nature of a “key”.
That's why I was making the distinction; I feel like you chose the interpretation of "key" that could be trivially dismissed, rather than what they probably meant in the context of their complaint.
Luckily, we've got two implementations that we can compare, and that it would be logical to assume we're talking about: The Touch Bar and the row of keys that it replaced. The TB adds some pros: continuous (slider-like) or discrete (key-like) behavior, display of dynamic information, and general flexibility. It has some cons too, though: Lack of tactile feedback makes it impossible to use without looking, it potentially requires extra key-presses (and glances to the keyboard) to use the old functionality, key placement isn't predictable, etc.
My point being: It's reasonable to assume that the comment you originally replied to was complaining about the difference between virtual and physical keys, but your reply basically said "that doesn't matter, because you can simulate the missing keys".