Do you think touch screen cameras like the Nikon D5600 make cameras like the Nikon D5 look like 70's computers without the mouse?

Would you like if technology allowed you to have a professional camera with touch screen and as small and light as the D5600?

Somewhat… Looks more like a 2000 camera.

Yes

I hate touchscreen. I prefer buttons even if takes longer to reach the desired setting.

I can't imagine going from my Samsung S8+ to my abandoned Nokia 5130. So, I guess you have a point there.

I rarely use the touch screen on my Nikon D500 except to enlarge or move from image to image.

The buttons are still the best (and fastest) way to make changes in camera settings.

Do you know what kind of computers existed in the 1970's? They were as large as your corner 7/11 shop

Computers which were small enough and inexpensive enough for a person to use did not appear until the middle of 1980 and only a few of them supported the use of a mouse. Touchscreens are relatively new to the computer world and are mostly are found on mobiles and tablets.

The Nikon D5 is a professional grade, full frame digital SLR and the D5600 is an entry level digital SLR.

Really, your question makes no sense and shows that you may want to do some research into the first computers and when "personal computers" became available to the "common" man

You may want to spend some time comparing the D5 to theD5600. You will note that they both have touch screens

I see nothing wrong with pressing buttons for features, functions and options as opposed to touch-screens that are loaded with annoying finger prints (I so abhor and detest… Even HATE… Fingerprints on screens and monitors, or anywhere!).

Depends how you like to control your camera. It is certainly cheaper to build a camera without lots of buttons to control the various features, but possibly slower to operate all those various functions without having dedicated buttons away from the screen.

For myself, I always prefer separate buttons rather than having to plough through menus.

It's gimmicky to draw in the cell phone crowd. I wouldn't find much use for it since I can control my camera with buttons and dials whilst looking through the view finder. No need to ply through menus and trying to shade the screen when the sun washes out the screen. Plus, running the LCD wastes valuable power. Not having useless frills on a camera doesn't make me think any less of it. Simple is better.

My Canon 7D has a touch screen that allows quick access to key functions.
I press one button to activate it and get rapid access to things that otherwise need menus to be navigated because there's no button.
Examples of features where I use the quick access:
adjusting flash exposure compensation
switching between half-shutter-press for autofocus and half-shutter-press for exposure lock
changing white balance
changing picture style
switching on the Wi-Fi so I can view images on my tablet.

I can also use it to change shutter, aperture, ISO, AF modes etc but I generally use the buttons for that.

I thought it was a gimmick at first and it certainly played zero part in my purchase decision but now when I use my old DSLRs I realise just how good it is.

Like everything it is down to personal taste. But there are dinosaurs… The same ones who said pro photographers would never use digital and now say mirrorless will never replace DSLR and look on articulated touch screens as "toys for wannabes" not for "real" photographers:-).

BTW - 70's computers didn't need a mouse because they were 100% text based with no graphic interface.

Not at all.