What is this thing against software?

This whole argument makes about as much sense as whether acoustic instruments are better than synths. Or as much sense as someone arguing that a piano is a crap instrument because it can't emulate a moog properly.

Except lots of softsynths ARE pretending to be a moog or an ARP. I call a spade a spade at that point.

For me, I am interested in the softsynths that are their own thing

And I agree with the last post that it seems as if I don't hear this argument anymore anyway.
As I mentioned, it's usually when someone tries to tell me that I'm a dinosaur as all my hardware can be replicated in software that the argument starts, NOT hardware owners dissing software. We are too dignified

There are some very good softsynths that emulate analog instruments. It's true that they'll never sound as good as the real thing, but if the real thing was as cheap, as portable and as easy to acquire as the softsynth then there wouldn't be a market for them. That doesn't mean they should ever replace their hardware counterparts - that would be silly. The point is to provide an alternative means of making music. That's true whether you want to use it as a unique instrument in its own right, or whether you want that "sound" (no matter how close it gets). In my case I use certain softsynths and VSTs because here in tropical northern Australia the high humidity destroys electronics within months, plus shipping is very expensive and there's nowhere here to get them serviced. The hardware stuff I do have is forever giving me problems.

We don't all have to own Steinway Grands in order to get a good piano sound, although pointing out on the CD inlay that you've got one probably appeals to some people.

I never look to see how the music is made. Maybe I should. I've had persons tell me it was made using this or that. I'll bend my ear to see if I can tell the difference. To no avail. It all boiles down to, do I like it?