Lately all the latest products from Apple require certain CPU speeds (or other aspects) from recent machines that don't always fit the low end models. So I'm wondering a few things: (1) Given that Apple is first and foremost a software company, does Apple ask for too much with their software in terms of system requirements? If not, what happens to those lower end Mac users (iMac, iBook, G3, L2 cache etc.) when more advanced OS X software develops and consumes CPU loads? (2) Since Apple doesn't seem to focus too much on developing a low-end, sub-$900 or sub-$1000 i-eMac, is it possible that Apple overmarkets the high end products just so that consumers don't have to worry about CPU loads/loading time for more advanced OS X apps? (3) If Apple puts out, say, a 15 inch LCD 700MHz G4 iMac with low end specs for simplistic low-end usage, (a) what price should be given to it, and (b) will it easily keep up with Apple's dedicated software compared to more recent Mac models? See my point is, you can find cheap PCs all over the place for bottom of the line specs (in fact, I think over at DeviantART there is an ad for a $539 low end PC, and you get to install your choice of Windows OS). But I don't think that the issue about pricing difference and customer satisfaction about software speed is just related to how easily companies provide PC hardware. I think the software also comes into play. Now I'm sure that the same applies for PC users, but IF Apple and Microsoft both competed for a bottom of the line desktop machine for even $699, I think that (A) the user would find apps/graphics running on a PC more responsive, and (B) Apple would have to significantly reduce the speed/specs of their machine to meet the price. Comments/suggestions?