Earlier this week, Apple did the thing we’ve all known it would for months and finally unveiled its touchscreen MacBook Pro . Awkwardly dubbed the “PROLED XDR Display,” Apple says the touchscreen panel gives pro users “a whole new way to interact with their content.” Yet, to say I’m unconvinced would be an understatement. While I’m excited for that OLED goodness, I’ve long been skeptical of the benefits of touchscreen laptops, as I find their gesture interactions to be by turns unnecessary and uncomfortable to use for long periods of time. And if something is either so unnecessary that you don’t use it or so uncomfortable that it causes your arms to ache, it probably shouldn’t be in a product. But hey, what do I know? Practically every Windows laptop manufacturer offers at least one touchscreen version, and now Apple has got in on the act. I’m sure Apple will do what it often does and blow everyone else away with a perfected feature that redefines what a touchscreen display should be about … right? Actually, scratch that, I’m still totally unconvinced. Because not only has Apple completely sidestepped the entire issue of arm fatigue, but it seems the company can’t even convincingly explain why anyone should buy a touchscreen MacBook in the first place (and let’s not even talk about the $2,899 starting price or the $14,549 maximum configuration ). No, I think I’ll be sitting this one out. Here’s why you might also want to. Simply the best? (Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future) If we want to understand why this touchscreen MacBook Pro exists — and maybe why you should buy one — we should look at how Apple frames it . The company says that “Graphic designers can now use the entire display as their canvas, no longer constrained by the area of the trackpad when drawing,” and that “musicians can play software instruments right onscreen.” But does Apple actually think that doing either of those things is going to be remotely comfortable for more than about 10 seconds? There’s a reason why people play keyboards horizontally, after all: because playing an entire gig with your arms held rigid and outstretched is a quick path to aching limbs. Why would it be any different on a laptop? Surely Apple doesn’t picture long-term usage like that, so my guess is it expects you’ll do a few quick taps on-screen and then go back to a normal, sane way of using your laptop. But if you only interact with the touchscreen for a few seconds at a time, is it really worth it? Is that kind of limited interaction good value for money when you’re paying a $400 premium over the regular MacBook Pro? Maybe, maybe not, but the fact that Apple’s big, expensive, flagship feature is something many people will simply shrug their shoulders at suggests a failure of inspiration on Apple’s part. Yes, you get a beautiful OLED panel as well for your $400, and that I think is easily justified. But every feature in a product you buy should be able to justify its existence, especially in an Apple product and especially in these expensive times. Yet the touchscreen panel just feels like it’s come along for the ride. After all, Apple is the company that has reinvented category after category, from portable music players to smartphones to tablets and beyond. And now the best it can do is a feature that isn’t comfortable to use for long periods and that is best employed in short bursts with extended periods of inactivity in between. If Apple, of all companies, can’t blow you away with a feature that resets expectations of how the category should work, why is it bothering at all? Apple’s mantra has long been not to be first, but to be best…