[Epic 4G General] Solandri:
Actually when iPods first came out, they didn't match up. They were missing lots of features commonly available on other MP3 players. There still are (you have to plug in a separate attachment to get FM radio, no memory expansion slot). What they got right was a clean look and a dirt simple user interface. That expanded the MP3 market from techies to the general public. (Same reason Linux on the desktop was pretty much just a toy for techies until Ubuntu expanded its appeal a bit.)

I really blame Microsoft/Intel for this. When the concept of PC tablets came up, they saw $$$ and tried to steer it towards a high-end notebook using a full version of Windows. Consequently we ended up with $3000 tablets which were thicker than a regular notebook (due to the swivel screen), and needed a faster processor, more memory, and a modified version of Windows. They needed all this (consequently putting more $$$ into Microsoft's and Intel's pockets) because they were basically regular notebooks with tablet features grafted on.

I always through there was a market for a reduced-functionality tablet - something which wasn't as powerful as your desktop or notebook. The strong initial sales of netbooks made perfect sense to me because of this, even though all my techie friends seemed to think netbooks were an affront to technology. And I predicted the iPad would do well even though I had started to dislike Apple as a company by then.

So it wasn't really a matter of Microsoft trying to create a tablet market and failing. It was them trying to create a tablet market in their image (meaning extra sales of Windows licenses), instead of what the market wanted (a cut-down simpler product).

Actually I got one of those Sony laptops for $600 (VPC-Z122GX, yes the 3 lb Z with SSD). While Sony's retail prices are higher than Apple's, their street prices are similar, and if you can get one on sale they're considerably cheaper than Apple's.

Apple caters primarily to people who prioritize image and style. Their "original idea" is taking complex technology (e.g. BSD Unix) and simplifying it to where these people can use it easily (OS X). They're very good at that.

But that's also the problem. Because most of their userbase are designers or artistic types, those people don't believe in form following function. To them, form is the primary goal in and of itself. Consequently many Apple fans don't see a problem with patenting the UI, or look and feel, or design of a product.

You can argue with them all you want that tablets have to be flat and rectangular because that's the ideal shape of a screen. That the screen has to be black because that's what color it has to be to maximize contrast ratio. And that the corners need to be rounded because otherwise it pokes into things and causes greater stress on the case. You can argue this til you're blue in the face. But because they are "form follows function" arguments, it falls upon deaf ears among many Apple fans. To them, form trumps function, so if Apple came up with this form first, then they deserve protection for it regardless of function.

Hopefully the courts will see how nonsensical that is. The current EU injunction is based on the Galaxy Tab being a black rectangular slab with a bezel and rounded corners. Nothing more. That's crazy. If it stands, then the EU as an economic entity is done for, as every company on Earth is going to register every basic geometric shape they can think of.