The first assumption that is just wrong is calling the Apple laptop a netbook and that assumption is wrong because you underestimate the power of the computer.
I've already gone through the trouble of comparing the Macbook's specs to current generation netbooks. They're on par in terms of screen size, processor power, and weight. You're getting too worked up about the term "netbook", but it's a fair classification. The 5Y70 proc in the new Macbook is only marginally faster than the 2367M in Lenovo's 130e netbook, and that's only because that particular netbook uses a proc that is two generations older than the new Macbook.
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i3-2367M-vs-Intel-Core-M-5Y70
This new proc (Broadwell) is simply a die shrink of the previous generation, not a redesign. That doesn't make it magically so much more powerful that I, as an avid technology fan, can't fathom it's power.
The second assumption that you have which is wrong is your use of the word "main."
It's a subjective opinion, hence it's not possible for me to be wrong. That said, I'm using the word "main" to describe "primary", which also is reasonable. I direct you to the dictionary under synonyms:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/main
How do I know that? Most people already use a significantly less powerful machine as their main computer.
So you're saying that the 5th generation Core M chip at 1.1ghz is more powerful than most computers that are say 1-4 years old, but I'm the one that is wrong in my estimates of the processor's power? Have you even bothered looking at the benchmarks?
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+M-5Y70+@+1.10GHz&id=2382
Screen Size is a weird one because many people accomplish most of the tasks they want to achieve on an iPhone. I think screen size need isn't mandatory.
I don't count people that primarily use a smartphone as what I consider to be "computer users".
In terms of "least powerful class of intel processor," I think this is a completely myopic view of the tasks people use computers to accomplish nowadays. This "least powerful" processor is more powerful than many computers sold even a year ago.
For that to be true, the average computer sold a year ago would need a Core M proc. I see way more i3, i5, and i7 and their AMD equivalents in use than Core M. As you can see by the benchmarks, this simply isn't true unless you're talking about bottom dollar i3's that are 3+ generations old.
Besides it's a logical fallacy to argue that it should suit the needs for the average user based on the fact that the average user doesn't need a new computer yet.
Stop with the unicorn tears and apple logo nonsense. It's you who seems to have the incorrect view of what "normal" and "average" is.
Yet you seem bent on declaring a fanless Broadwell Core M processor as the pinnacle of processing performance. Clearly we have vastly different experience in the computing industry.
I personally plan on exercising one of the new MacBooks and I'll be sure to revisit this thread and agree that I'm wrong if it outpaces my 2011 model desktop or most of the computers I've used or worked on in the last couple years.
Next you'll tell me that most people will be perfectly happy with a twin sized bed and a 1 cylinder moped as their primary forms of bedding and transportation.
to wct097. To the OP, you're right, since "main machine" is a personal definition. I agree with almost everything you're posting on the rMB but I do have to say that the size, power and port limitations would totally disqualify the rMB as my principal machine. That doesn't matter - I will probably buy one because it could be a very useful secondary machine. 
