I agree that both 10 and 60 minute games are in a gray area as far as what rapid chess means. A beginner won't have too much trouble playing a whole game in 10 minutes and a good player will have enough time to put some thought into their moves in a 60 minute game, however they both will have to think somewhat 'rapidly,' while not quite blitzing out moves. I can see the advantage from chess.com's view of having 3 of the top 10 most popular time controls in the same group (10|0, 15|10, and 30|0), to give a single rating that is comparable across players in a very general way.
But 30 minute games should not be considered classical. Approximately 80 percent of players will consistently run out of time if they try to put their whole thought process into the game.
The real problem is that there is no standard time control past 60|0 and therefore no classical games or rating. Also consider the fact that the increment for 45|45 is a bit long for a 45 minute game (making it longer than 60|0 in reality) and running out of time in a 60|0 with no increment is quite painful.
If I had my way, I would have rapid games go from 10|0 to 45|10, and classical games of 60|30 and 90|45.
Seems strange, as they are vastly different time controls with different skill sets. I think anything 30 minutes and over should be put into a new category, "Classical", and then anything under 30 but greater than 5 be considered Rapid.