Seriously though, I consider four kinds of panoramic photography:
a) The camera panoramic which is done on a camera with a wide angle lens and panoramic film back. Its main effect is that of the wide angle distortion and otherworldly perspective.
b) The digital panoramic stitching that creates a more "normal" viewpoint as it does not have the perspective distortion of the panoramic camera. It needs the most work to be successful and can't be done in one frame, thus they never include people unless even more post-processing collage techniques are applied.
c) A panorama made by putting normal rectangular photos next to each other. Apart from the visible seams or borders, the photographs themselves don't have to match and as such it is a creative decision of its own.
d) By cropping. It has the perspective of the lens used, but the main problem is the loss of resolution when enlarged as it is only a smaller part of a larger photograph. Also, more difficult to compose in camera unless a mask is used.
All are very different in artistic potential and meaning.
Also, I personally, do not like "fake tricks" as I call them, that is, post-processing that remains hidden from the audience and in digital often mimics analogue processes and characteristics and other visual media as well. In this case I feel that the creator is fooling the audience and is not being truthful to himself and may have moved to a medium different from photography but has not realised or telling.
Real photographs, created in camera, 100% organic,
no digital additives and shit