I think the best argument in this article that hasn't really been stated elsewhere is (paraphrasing): "the pro machine needs to adapt to the needs of the profes

I think the best argument in this article that hasn't really been stated elsewhere is (paraphrasing): "the pro machine needs to adapt to the needs of the professional producers (music, dev, writers that need insane battery life, etc)". His main thesis was "play with the Macbook Air, iMac, Macbook lines, but if you're going to use the 'Pro' branding, be capable of supporting professional use cases." The other interesting thought nugget from the article was buried up at the top: (paraphrasing) "perhaps too many consumers have been buying Macbook Pros because it's a sturdy, dependable machine. This consumer support and use product may be producing marketing and usage metrics drowning out the ACTUAL use cases of the professionals that need a more powerful machine." If this new generation MBP is really just a slightly enhanced Macbook Air because that's how several million people choose to use their MBP, it ignores the tens of thousands of people that need "pro" level hardware (or even just modifyability) in order to create content (iOS apps, music, video, software) that actually drives Apple's Walled Garden ecosystem.