The last polycarbonate Mac was the 13-inch unibody MacBook released in May 2010 and discontinued in July 2011. It cost $999 but was powerful enough to meet even prosumer needs. Its weaker points were perhaps the graphics card — an NVIDIA GeForce 320 M sharing 256 MB with the main memory — and the lack of a FireWire port. For the rest, it was a capable machine, with a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, and with the RAM that turned out to be expandable to 16 GB. The most notable weakness, though, was ironically the ‘durable polycarbonate unibody enclosure’, which was prone to ugly cracks in the most-stressed spots (such as the hinge area on the back). But that’s not the point. 

Let me get to the point by first going back in time. In 1999, when Apple was back on track under Steve Jobs’s direction, all Macs were made of some kind of plastic/polycarbonate material. The separation between consumer and pro machines was indicated by the name scheme, essentially. If the Mac’s name started with an ‘i’, then it was a consumer/prosumer model (iMac, iBook). If it started with ‘Power’, then it was a professional model (Power Mac, PowerBook). This was, of course, reflected in the machine’s specs and prices. The entry-level Mac was the base iMac, with a G3/350 MHz CPU and a starting price of $999. The iBook was more expensive than you might remember: $1,599 for the base 300 MHz model. It was, however, very affordable compared with its professional counterpart: the base 333 MHz PowerBook G3 (“Lombard”) cost $2,499, and the 400 MHz model a jaw-dropping $3,499. Similar prices were found in the pro desktop line — the more high-end Power Mac G3 configurations exceeded $2,000, and the Power Mac G4 had a range of configurations that cost $2,499 to $3,499.

As time passed, and Apple researched new building materials for its computers, the separation between consumer and pro Macs was also conveyed by the materials employed and the enclosure designs. Around 2003–2004, the distinction between polycarbonate (indicating a consumer/prosumer machine) and aluminium (indicating a pro machine) had fully evolved. In this period, the entry-level Macs are the base 12-inch 800 MHz iBook G3 model (April-October 2003), priced at $999; then the base 12-inch 800 MHz iBook G4 model (October 2003 — April 2004), priced at $1,099; and the eMac (only $799 for the base G4/800 MHz model). This is probably the period where you can find the most affordable Macs in recent history that are also not ridiculously crippled when it comes to specifications.

In 2006, after the transition to Intel architecture, the situation isn’t much different: the white polycarbonate MacBook takes the slot that belonged to the iBook, and again the base model is sold at $1,099. The base 17-inch iMac isn’t much more expensive, by the way, and can be had for $1,199. But of course the most affordable Mac keeps being the Mac mini, introduced a year earlier, whose base model is only $599. Its chassis, however, is a mix of polycarbonate and aluminium, so it represents an exception to the “polycarbonate = consumer, aluminium = pro” rule.

But it doesn’t matter, because when I say that Apple needs polycarbonate again, I mean that in a sort of symbolic way — like in the era of the iBook and pre-retina MacBook, Apple should provide a true entry-level Mac made of a different material than aluminium. A Mac that isn’t too terribly crippled specs-wise, but affordable, a little more rugged and — why not? — a little more cheerful. For that, Apple won’t lose its status as a ‘premium’ tech company. If anything, this new ‘low-end’ Mac will signal that the company can smile and not take itself too seriously, just as it happened sometimes under Steve Jobs; and it will also help sell even more Macs. 

Yes, I still think that using $300–400 iPads as affordable consumer solutions isn’t always (and everywhere) the right strategy. Where I live, I keep seeing a lot of university students preferring cheap laptops over premium tablets as their portable solution. I know, Apple will never make a $400 MacBook, but a $799–899 model, in my opinion, could really be a hit in the low-end consumer and education slots. Apple’s recent trend in portable Macs has seen prices go up again, and I’ve been hearing old stereotypes come up again (e.g. Apple makes trendy products for rich people).

How to position it, though? The current laptop line would become even messier with a cheap MacBook, an expensive retina MacBook, the comparatively affordable MacBook Air, and the overpriced MacBook Pros. So here’s my slightly radical proposition.

• Discontinue the MacBook Air.
• Turn the current 12-inch retina MacBook into a 12-inch retina MacBook Pro.
• Added bonus: make that 12-inch retina MacBook Pro a bit thicker, a bit more powerful, and give it an additional USB‑C port.
• Make the MacBook the most affordable line again, even visually, with this hypothetical new ‘polycarbonate MacBook’; make it in different colours (but bright and vivid ones, like the iMac G3, the first iBooks, the iPod nanos, not the usual and boring space grey, silver and gold); make it reasonably thin (but thicker than the MacBook Pros) and give it at least a USB‑A port; cut costs by using a non-retina display, but perhaps something a bit better than the display in the current MacBook Air; and finally, give it a great battery life, something similar — or even better — than the MacBook Air.

This hypothetical new MacBook could be a sort of spiritual successor of both the old Mid-2010 white unibody MacBook and the MacBook Air line. A convergence of materials, designs, colours, for a product that would hark back to the 1999 era of Apple resurgence in the consumer market; a product that could turn out to be equally successful.

P.S. — Also, a product with a decent keyboard, please.