Apple has won this battle, here's to hoping they will lose the war.
Imagine if every car manufacturer would have to come up with a new user interface for the basics of the vehicle, if having front, rear and side windows would somehow be considered something that you could have the rights to.
A ridiculous game to play, don't you think?
People think that Apple did a lot of things on the iPad, but all they did was removing the pen, removing some useless physical buttons, using a tailored touch-oriented OS instead of adapting one from desktop computers, bootstrapping this operating system on years of success of the one for phones, using a single sheet of glass instead of plastic screen + plastic bezel, using the internet for app and media distribution, cutting corners to provide a midrange-laptop instead of costing an arm or a leg...
Don't forget how much they disappointed their geek fan base when they announced that their tablet was just a "bigger iPhone" instead of a "smaller iOS". And that's where Android wins: Android managed to actually change the opinions of geeks.
Seriously, Apple did some breakthrough changes. Android follows suit. Those lawsuits might piss you off, but give credit where credit is due.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Tab...
remove the physical keyboard and replace it with a soft keyboard provided by the os. voila! you've got an ipad!
by the way did you know hp's iPaq precedes iPad? aren't these two names are dangerously similar? they both have rounded corners.
http://img.tomshardware.com/us/2003/06/02/the_digital_writin...
-2003.
Brands each have a signature look. Sure, when there are frivolous patents that are a poison on the industry, but this is about whether Samsung crossed the line in how deceptively close their tabs look to an iPad. The German court seems to think they did. And I bet they did more analysis than most of us.
Once physics and usability enter in to the design process the constraints can be such that there will be fewer and fewer options and room to play without impacting those in a negative way.
Design is always a compromise. By going for a minimalist design you remove all of that room so any minimalist design for a device will likely be very much like every other minimalist design.
The Hofmeister kind is an addition that does not impact functionality, it is the opposite of going for something minimalist. It is a design component specifically added as a signature.
Now if Apple had added a feature that is not relevant to functionality instead of removing a whole pile of stuff that was not relevant and someone copied that particular element they'd have a case imo. As it stands all they've done is taken the device to its logical conclusion. That should not be a protectable configuration.
iPad: aluminium back, aluminium stretching out to create a visible border around the front of the device. Prominent single physical button on front of the device. 4:3 form factor.
Galaxy Tab: black textured plastic (?) back, front of the device pure black. No physical buttons on the front. 16:10 form factor.
But sure, identical on the outside...
120 years ago, it might have been...
Also, xPads before Apple looked different. The same with phones compared to iPhone.
The good part is that Samsung might start hiring designers and get ambitions in that area, too.
Disclaimer: I just bought a Ubuntu laptop instead of a Mac, but might buy another Mac next time. (And I love my iPad.)
Except, of course, for that phone reveled before the iPhone that had the same basic style. It was a style that the industry was headed towards anyway, apple just helped the momentum.
(You aren't talking about that Samsung phone which were announced before the iPhone but not shown until a good while after the iPhone was released?)
While the design doesn't necessarily predate the iPhone, it was at least developed concurrently, supporting the thesis of industry heading that way.