[Daedalus]

This is not a question of right or wrong, but rather a question of game system flexibility.

No, it is a question of genre.  If you're playing a board game, you use a board.  If you're playing a war game, you use a table.  If you're playing a roleplaying game, you don't need to use a board or a wargaming table.

That is the point of a roleplaying game as opposed to war game or a board game.  The only difference is that lately, a lot of board and war games have been released calling themselves roleplaying games which has confused newer players to the hobby into wondering why every other roleplaying game doesn't include board and war gaming rules by default.
[/quote

I respectfully disagree with your opinion. A good RPG has a strong element of story to support the roleplay aspect backed by a solid ruleset to determince success, failure, and to support play/gm visulization. In many cases this visulization requires a grid/hex based movement system. It seems that you and I are blessed with capable visulization skills, unfortunately not everyone is, and I think a system should cater to the widest cross section possible in order to promote the game. I am of the opinion that RPGs have evolved into this hybrid model and that is a good thing unless the ruleset forces the use of the tabletop to make it functional. Most of the Good RPGs that come to mind can still be played abstractly, but have strong tabletop rules as well. Best of both worlds and a win/win in my book.