For a much slower CPU and 1/4 the disk, and an OS that has no apps.

I would consider in this calculation that the chromebook comes with 1 terabyte free storage on the cloud for 3 years.

That's basically worthless in a country where people are paying $10 per GB for 4-5 megabit LTE service, or else hopping on Starbucks Wi-Fi access points to get 1-2 megabit service.

I can foresee scenarios where that would be useful: when we have unmetered 30-40 megabit wireless service everywhere. But very few people in the U.S. find themselves in that situation.

I don't see that. For most application the typical Wi-Fi access is enough, e.g. for music and movie streaming, working in Google Docs...

Even if it was only working on home Wi-Fi, it would be far from worthless. People pay $200 for a Wi-Fi home NAS. Having your home NAS available anywhere is a nice plus.

Also there is the screen that is higher resolution and multi-touch.

You're going to chew through 10 GB of LTE steaming music and movies. Working in Google Docs, maybe, but Google Docs sucks. I can justify $250 to use Google Docs over Starbucks WiFi. Not so much $1,300 to do the same thing.

Use QuickOffice that is integrated then.

Who uses 1TB of storage?

Totally agreed - but as has been mentioned elsewhere here, the overwhelming majority of computer owners aren't techies/developers. I definitely wouldn't buy one of these, but if you're basically a web user and you don't want to shell out for the MBP, I could see this being an appealing option I guess.

$1269 for a refurbished 13" rMBP

http://store.apple.com/us/product/FD212LL/A/refurbished-macb...

The importance of price anchoring...

$100 more? Is it better than a MacBook?

$200 less? Wow...MacBooks are so overpriced.

$200 less than a macbook retina 13" with 2560x1600. Up until now there have been no competitors even near this resolution.

And none of those devices do touch.