Hi John,
Thanks for your insight. Zaha Hadid’s and Frank Gehry’s projects are good, ‘extreme’ examples of using Rhino in architecture for complex shaped projects and definitely Rhino’s ability to produce these is an important component of it. By no means I suggest changing the focus, rather cheering for ‘widening your field of view’ 
Many architectural projects are not so complex geometrically and don’t necessary require the whole array of advanced surfacing tools but Rhino is still great when working on them. It’s fantastic to have these tools, when needed, no question about that. But for many, the strength of Rhino is the non-limiting approach in modeling, stability and reliability of the product, plus of course easiness to organize your files and working with large files, many file formats, excellent tools to work with 2D and 3D curves, scripting, parametrics with Grasshopper, great community and tech support, and I could go on and on. If I was to distill ‘why’ for architectural use, I would just say ‘non-limiting and very reliable modeler’ to make the case. The advanced surfacing would maybe come second… Obviously as world and workflows keep changing, Rhino is evolving along. I was recently making a case why Mesh tools should get some more attention in planning Rhino development ( More Mesh friendly Rhino ), not to suggest switching your development focus but rather recognize the common workflows and trends, at least in architectural user base and keep up with that while expanding Rhino in future.
As usual, thanks for listening !