It's a real shame, as I feel like there is a really comfortable space for the Touch in the MPC ecosystem. In addition to being the prototype for the Live, it also seems like a spiritual predecessor of the Studio. I get having an MPC-synced device that's on the lower-cost-end of offerings, but why not have a higher-end version of that (let's call it the MPC Studio Touch, or the MPC Touch 2) that also incorporates the touch/mobile UI.
The Live/Live2 took off, yes, in-part to its use as a standalone, but I get the sense that a lot of people find standalone appealing less because they like toting their MPCs around to make music all around town, and more because they want to work on the hardware itself rather than sitting in front of a kb/m/monitor. For someone who wants that standalone experience but doesn't want to, can't, or isn't yet sure they're willing to fork out standalone-tier money for a One+/Live/Key, a hybrid of the Studio and Touch would be perfect.
Failing that though, I don't see why a Touch couldn't be made to work with MPC 3 Windows. I'm not an engineer by any stretch of the imagination, so maybe there is some prohibitive factor I'm not aware of or can't understand, but the Touch is essentially a highly customized controller that syncs with MPC Windows/Mac. When I fired up MPC 3 Windows for the first time a few days ago, I was able to connect my Live 2 to it in controller mode despite my Live 2 still being on 2.x firmware. I don't see why the Touch shouldn't be able to do the same.
I'm hoping it's just something that isn't ready for beta, but that might be incorporated at a later date. I just find the Touch much more comfortable to work with at home. Its smaller footprint makes it more accommodating to my space, and the lighter profile makes it easier to shuffle around when I have additional controllers in the mix. I also slightly prefer some aspects of the button layout but that's a lesser consideration.
