I think my argument is very simple, it's obvious we just don't agree. Some points-
It'll be years before a notebook can be a DTR? Eh? Tell that to the folks that own the Sagers, 17" Acer, and Sony A190 etc. The last remaining factor to truly separate notebooks usability from desktop usability is upgradeable graphics, and it is being addressed currently by both ATI and Nvidia.
Every Apple computer (indeed, nearly every computer on the market) can do all the tasks that ~90% of the market wants/needs to do. Computing power has reached a plateau where, except for a handful of applications, no system offers huge benefits over another in day-to-day usage. Apple isn't aiming their iMacs and eMacs to the small portion of the market who cream over upgrading their computer for 2 more FPS or need to render/process data constantly. The majority of the market just wants a computer that *works*. People who use the computers for work tasks (graphic, video, mathematics, DSPetc) are willing to pay a premium for the G5.
The author bases his entire argument on a fallacy--there is no desktop worth considering offered between 800 and 2700 dollars. That's simply untrue. The iMac offers 15, 17, and 20 inch versions nicely placed between the two ends. Sorry, I don't accept hand waving as an argument. I should write an article "Alviso is delayed, thus Intel is getting out of the notebook market! If Alviso is released eventually then it'll prove me wrong..." Ridiculous arguments with gotchas at then end are still ridiculous arguments.
Would it be nice if Apple offered a G5 for $1200? Sure! And it will happen sooner or later, once IBM gets their yields up. It isn't some big conspiracy to keep G5s out of cheaper desktops. It might even be what's announced at WWDC. But all this doom and gloom over the fact that a G5 was not offered the same time as the speed bumped G5 Power Macs? Absolutely ridiculous.
"but the most important announcement Apple made last week are the announcements it DIDN’T make."
"Until then, I say that Apple is abandoning the PC desktop altogether in favor of the higher-margin workstation market. Time will tell how smart it was to do so."
If you can honestly say that conclusion he made follows from the argument he makes in the article, and is at all based in reality, then I'm not sure what to say. Suffice to say I disagree that Apple's dead in the water with their desktops--the timing of this article with WWDC around the corner and without mentioning it is just bizarre. That fact alone gives the article no credence IMO.
If anything, the speed bumped G5's and Airport Express announcements earlier this month with the WWDC later in the month are an obvious sign that a huge announcement is pending.
Incidentally, I have no doubt that within 3 years (if not sooner), the iBook and iMac will be one in the same. But that's not a measure of Apple's failure in the desktop market, it's a measure of the effect of the computing power plateau on the form factor of computers. Unless someone comes out with a killer app that needs huge amounts of processing power that will be as useful as a word processor or an Internet browser (Doom 4 and Half Life 3 don't count), there will be no need to keep computers the size of a current desktop tower. (or even the size of a SFF machine like my current Shuttle).