... and I'm used to analysts BS by now.

I think it should be a rule that if an analyst doesn't use a Mac, and 'get' Apple - that they are barred from any opinions.

1/ If Apple's notebooks already make the competition look decades behind - why do Apple need to upgrade their 'look'.
2/ The idea that people by Mac's purely 'to be seen with' is so patronising that I'm speechless. If so, why do people wrap them in protective cases and still use 4 year old powerbooks?
3/ Why do Apple need to take a hit in profit just to make life difficult for the competition - it's already doing that and making lots of money. I would imagine shareholders feel profit is a good idea in the present climate, rather than waste it on petty, childish taunting of competitors.
4/ What in Odin's name could he mean with that tortured metaphor 'tiptoe through the tulips and check out the undersoil'!? Top marks for obfuscation - zero marks for information.

I think the author is right, foolish obfuscations aside. Apple needs to be inclusive in the way it promotes the Mac range. It does so with the iPod Shuffle which is the definition of a bare-bones iPod, surely. Most people don't have a lot of free cash. Apple needs to cater to this largest of market segments if it wants to spread the brand to its fullest coverage. The iPod shuffle doesn't cheapen the brand. A Mac Nano (for want of a better name) would open the door for tens or hundreds of millions to enter the Apple experience. Remember, the Mac is the ultimate Apple product and it is also an (admitedly large) iPod. For people who cannot afford every gizmo, a low cost Mac would satisfy many wants, not just the wish for a computer.

The problem with the comparison between a shuffle and a nano Macbook is that the Shuffle has a _vastly_ reduced feature set. You get the logo/brand, and a solid, good quality player, but you also don't get a screen or any of the other "goodness." Let's imagine a MacBook Nano in a similar vein--no hard drive? greatly reduced hard drive? Not expandable? low memory? tiny screen (800x480)? How many compromises? And if they don't compromise? Too many MacBook purchasers buy the Nano, undercutting the MacBook.... No, I highly doubt a Nano from Apple. I suspect that they are quite happy with people buying a Wind and hacking OSX onto it. Let them play with it, fall in love with the OS, but then get frustrated enough trying to get it to work right that they buy a higher-margin MacBook. Perversely enough, I suspect that this is Apple's "strategy."

-Jon

I don't want Apple to engage in any race to the bottom on price based on cost of components.

I think people that switch to a Mac do so after realizing the personal cost of having a PC ( hard to use, unstable, loss of data due to viruses, etc ) and therefore add value to a Mac way beyond the cost of components.

Apple doesn't need to race to the bottom. They can lower prices significantly enough to keep higher margins than their competitors, but squeeze their competitors even more. If the others are forced to lower their prices, they run the risk of collapsing from their own weight-- they'll have to sell even more computers to maintain the same income they make now, but considering that PC buying trends are showing no major growth, they wouldn't be able to make it this way.

Dell and HP get this already. Notice all of their higher end stuff coming out-- the Touchsmart, the Studio hybrid (stylish Dell)? They seem to notice that it's not enough to sell the junk anymore. They're trying to raise their image and sales. If Apple squeezes them now, it could get very interesting.