My point is that it isn't viable now, already. I'm arguing they need to intervene because they can't keep peddling eight-month-old tech at the same price they asked in October. We're talking about a non-upgradeable subnotebook with an asking price of 2,500 or threabouts. Given that people are going to want to keep it for a couple of years at least, you can't expect them to buy something that is old to begin with. Eight-month old technology means that at the end of the two-year period you're essentially stuck with a three year-old computer (or, alternatively, that your two-year window of usability actually closes only 14 months after purchase).
Apple could manage expectations more proactively by cutting prices for models it hasn't refreshed for over six months - but of course they hardly ever cut prices - if I'm not mistaken they didn't cut prices on year-old Mac Pros and Mac Minis. I strongly suspect that they make most of their margin on models close to refresh, when original component costs have plummeted.
Regardless, this double rigidity of outdated tech and fixed price conspire to make purchasing a Mac beyond the first few months of refresh an irrational act. Price can be left unchaned for perhaps three months or so - beyond that, consumers really are paying an "Apple Tax".
Don't get me wrong: the Rev. C is a beautiful machine (grey lines excepted) and 2,500 was a fair asking price when it was introduced in October. Now is not then. For that amount of money, I expect much more. Basically that's why none of us here are willing to spend our cash for an out-dated model... that's probably why sales are trailing off (if indeed confirmed)... and that's why it is in Apple's interest to refresh the line promptly if it expects to maintain it's price-point.
