Yeah, I was just talking to my brother aboutthis. I went through a couple of the original MacBooks back in the day, when it was the low-end, low-price version compared to the Pro. I was kind of annoyed when we were in the market for another laptop a few years ago and realized the MacBook had been discontinued in favor of the Air, and I now had to choose between "paying more for performance" with the Pro or "paying more for miniaturization" with the Air, when I didn't care about either and preferred to just pay less for a low-end model.
Bringing it back now, it's in a very weird spot. The MacBook is more expensive than the Air. It's *thinner and lighter* than the Air. It's also more expensive than the low-end Pro, and equally priced against the mid-range Pro that's got a lot more stuff. Only the high-end Pro is more expensive. You know you've got a branding problem when your Air isn't the lightest and your Pro isn't the most expensive in the line.
My brother's main argument boiled down to "it's gold."
I can only assume given a few iterations of product this will settle back out to something sensible, but it's as confusing as heck. (Just like last night, when the paint store wanted me to choose between ultra and premium, or when McDonald's small drink was a medium and its large was an extra, and they'd correct you if you tried to order the small.)