(1) You can't live on touchscreen interfaces unless you are just watching video and playing basic games.
(2) Tablets are a new device category, one that focuses on media consumption. Instead of Windows RT (Wart - windows-arm-rt?), Microsoft could have gone with Microsoft Tablet or some xBox/Kinect type of new name. No - they just had to put the Windows name (to leverage the brand) on an OS which is completely sealed and shut-off- thereby ensuring market confusion. They want to have the cake and eat it too - and they are going to get burned! (BTW, the Microsoft bloat hardly runs well on powerful x86, we'll see how it does on 32-bit ARM). Looks like Microsoft is just begging to be slapped by highly po-ed customers.
(3) If you want to do more with a device (other than media consumption), you need a regular Windows PC or a Mac. And here legacy and drivers matter!
(4) Littlejr will probably not care about the architecture or OS, but I'm sure his parents who pay for it will. They would want a device that does all that Littlejr wants to do instead of buying multiple devices (at least, sensible parents will). And they would devices with a longer shelf life and no headaches in terms of drivers for Littlejr's camera and/or camcorder.
(5) A cool x86 hybrid Ultrabook is the only device that seems to address all of the above. Along with a cool x86 Smartphone :)
Other than Apple which has brand cachet, no other ARM company like little Nvidia or its device customers has any clout (so highly unlikely Littlejr is going to ask mommy or daddy for a Windows RT device to show off to his buddies).
While Littlejr may ask for a $199 x86 Google-Motorola Mobility device because Google is way cool. And parents may just oblige because $199 isn't too much to make their kid look cool. But then, they will also have to get him a cool Ultrabook to do some studyin'.
I agree with Intel - Tablets and PCs are complementary devices. You can carry them separately or carry one hybrid.