If all that is true, then why does Apple state this right on their webpage:
In the first part of their marketing pitch, they highlight the importance of having a trackpad available with the onscreen keyboard. But then there’s no mention of a trackpad at all when they pitch their keyboard folio option, which the unsuspecting consumer might think also includes a trackpad — given the emphasis Apple just gave it as being built into the iPad itself.
Why mention that feature at in their primary marketing if it doesn’t matter to customers, and isn’t an important part of a customers needs?
At best it’s inconsistent marketing. At worst it’s a failed effort to address an obvious deficiency they understand is an issue for their customers.
No one says it doesn't matter. They're saying that the display itself
acts as a trackpad. That is absolutely true. It's a different paradigm. And to the people these ads, and that marketing, is targeted to, will get it, and to them it isn't inconsistent or confusing. The problem here is people are trying to project their preconceive notions onto Apple's direction.
The real issue here is Apple isn't talking to us long time computer users who are set in our ways. Apple is talking to everyone else. And those people understand and appreciate it, and buy the products, because they solve their problems.
And do you really think someone is going to buy the keyboard folio without actually looking at it? One cursory glance shows it obviously doesn't include a trackpad. And the marketing very clearly says the display acts as the trackpad. The only reason you don't get it, is because you're projecting your old school notions into it. But normal people without those notions won't read it the way you are, and won't be confused.
You see the absence of a trackpad as a
deficiency, because you're used to a trackpad (or mouse) and can't do without one. It's reasonable that you can't do without one because of your use case. It's unreasonable to describe the absence of a trackpad/mouse as a deficiency for all use cases, when there are plenty of people that don't have your background etc. and would find this new paradigm much more natural than the old school paradigm you're used to.
I stand by my point that the problem here is not Tim, or Apple, or these ads, or the marketing. The problem is all the people who these ads are
not targeted to, coming here and complaining about how these ads don't fit
their paradigms, when there are still plenty of people around for whom these new paradigms fit much better than the old ones.