Sales figures show a completely different story though. Windows 8/8.1 and 10 are build with this type of device in mind. If we look at current notebooks/ultrabooks for Windows a large portion is of the same type as the Microsoft Surface Pro. Lots of people, schools, businesses, etc. are now using the Surface Pro because it can run full fledged Windows and also have the ability for note taking with a pen. Lots of people who study are recommending these type of devices (I believe they are calling them 2-in-1's now). You can also see this in sales. Microsoft produces this batch by batch and you have to be quick because each batch is sold out rather quickly. It's like the Apple Pencil. Sales figures also show that with each new model they are selling more and more.
My point exactly. That's were you'd use a dockingstation/port replicator that you connect to the notebook via 1 port. No need for extra ports in that use case

The external monitor argument is just as silly as carrying around an external monitor.
Maybe, or maybe it showed the direction the MacBook Air is heading. Let's not forget the rumours about this one!
That's what I said: only 1 USB port, just like the MacBook and the Surface Pro.
With 4 even more comfortably and with 10 you can also connect the various external drives, printer, tablet, charge smarthone, etc. It's not about the amount of ports, it's about purpose of the device itself. The MacBook is not intended for people requiring all sorts connections and using those connections simultaneously. This device is meant for those that do not require wired peripherals when on the road (again, a dockingstation/port replicator allows you to use those peripherals on fixed set ups). It is meant to be mobile and carrying around a lot of equipment (keyboard, mouse, tablet, disk, etc.) is not really what you'd call "mobile". The MacBook Pro is the one that is meant for people who need/want to carry around lots of equipment and thus need lots of ports.
Even with your changes it won't do that. The MacBook is similar in price as the MacBook Air. The difference: the MacBook is more portable, has a better display but the Air is more powerful and yet has a better battery life. Currently there is too much overlap between the MacBook and MacBook Air. If you don't need all that power you can save money if you buy a lower specced MacBook Air. Is it really a problem? That depends. Sometimes manufacturers try things out and the MacBook could be just that. Which is also the reason why people are comparing it to the first 2 MacBook Air generations.
As we Dutch say: you are currently turning small things like a mosquito into something big as an elephant (which is simple saying that you are nitpicking and that you are focussing on the wrong things). Remember: the MacBook, MacBook Air and MacBook Pro all require the use of adapters due to the Thunderbolt port. The MacBook Pro is able to use HDMI which is useless when the projector/display is still using VGA (and there are still an awful lot of those). In reality it doesn't matter which Apple notebook you buy because you end up with carrying the same kind of adapters anyway. The problem isn't that big.
If battery life is important then you shouldn't have bought the MacBook. Both the Air and the Pro offer better battery life.
Also remember that your pro might be a con to someone else and vice versa. You want to help someone? Then help them with forming their own opinion and let them make their own decision by merely giving them some facts. Don't do what you are doing now: respond emotionally and impose your opinion onto others.
Btw, most executives here are wanting/being given an iPad and using it mostly. The notebook is for use at their desk. There are many programs for going paperless that are based upon the use of a tablet (mostly the iPad). A lot of what they do consist of documents and interacting with the CRM system (which is either an app on the tablet or a website). And yes, there are exceptions.
Still not getting the point are you?
The only reason faster boot times are there is performance. It is not there for battery life or because an OS does a crappy job at energy saving. Sleep/wake is faster thus the entire faster boot times argument is completely moot. And besides that we are talking about a technology shaving of 1 or 2 seconds if you are lucky. The only way to notice what this does is by using a stopwatch and measuring it. It is nitpicking, it is semantics and it is a completely useless argument (the Dutch saying applies here as well). I can't make the point more clear than this.
Only when responding rationally you are able to see the exceptions and specific requirements. When responding emotionally you only see what you want to see. And it shows here because not many are asking questions. Most are too busy trying to win something you cannot win (a discussion) and/or disproving the other. No one benefits from that because the only thing it does is scare away anyone actually looking for information/getting their questions answered. So no, I'm not the one overlooking things, you are since you're still not getting the point.
Judging by the amount of emotional posts in this thread and on this forum where a lot of people are not buying a product or not upgrading to a certain software version because some people on a forum experience problem(s) I'd say that a small amount of people on the forum here are really able to do this. The others merely
think they can. If they were actually capable there would be much less bickering.