Your opinion would have been wrong, because Nobody would have been happy. Certainly not desktop users, who would not have been able to find this hidden hack.
It would be hidden in the Control Panel.
The various blogs and media mouthpieces would "advertise" its location.
Just like they have had to regarding the hidden "Boot to desktop" option (in W8.1).
Metro users would not be happy because, if the desktop hack actually did become common knowledge, why would anyone write Metro apps? (the OS/2 dillemna), and MS would not be happy because Users would still be dependent upon their Win32 (ie x86/64 architecture) apps, making it that much harder for ARM based devices to gain a foothold.
People constantly claim that Win32 programs are unsuitable for battery powered devices, but WinRT is suitable for those uses.
If this is true then Apps for phones and tablets would be written in WinRT,
if RT was a easier/better development environment and/or provided "end device benefits" (i.e if consumers were to "lap them up" for
whatever reason).
Your problem is that you misunderstand Microsoft's motives. It's not to make users use a tablet. It's to get users off x86 architecture dependency. They may still use x86 chips, but apps need to be able to run on any hardware platform going forward. That's what WinRT is all about.
In fact, in 2 out of the 3 quotes above, you let slip that the real reason is to
force users to use a new architecture.
This architecture "just happens" to be highly suited to phones and tablets.
If it wasn't about tablets, then why all the tablet hoopla?
Why all of the whining about people not purchasing desktops?
Why introduce a touchscreen interface for desktops, if no one is buying them?
The fact is that phones and tablets are treated as disposable items (by the majority of consumers apparently).
They are replaced at a far higher rate than desktops and laptops.
MS wanted a slice of that action.
Their motives are crystal clear.
They get nothing from Win32 programs (except the ones they sell).
They want to take a cut from every bit of software that runs on their OS, just like Apple does (apart from free Apps obviously).
Take Adobe Creative Suite (the software that is used as the prime example for people not being able to swap to Linux-based operating systems).
Adobe was raking in >$1K from Creative Suite purchases (I don't know what the US price is) and MS were getting nothing.
If MS tried to "lock down" Win32, they get sued into oblivion by software companies and fined by the EU (maybe even the US Government).
WinRT was created in an attempt to bypass that problem.