A tablet is, by definition, a minimalistic device. Concepts like "rounded borders" have been used for quite a bit longer than tablets, and applying a basic design principal should hardly be considered infringing.

No one is going to buy a Samsung device because they think it's an iPad- or even that it looks like an iPad. The difference between the two devises is really about the internals and, much more importantly, the operating system. I've got a ton of Apple devices that I really love, including an iPad, but I really don't see this as anything other than Apple trying to shut competitors out of the market.

> A tablet is, by definition, a minimalistic device.

Yeah. Today. But, once upon a time, a tablet was, by definition, a hobbled laptop with a touch screen. Sometimes with elaborate rotating screen or stowable keyboard, almost always with a stylus. I know – I used them for years.

Then the iPad happened.

http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uplo...

And then, like fucking magic or something, all the other tablets started looking... like an iPad. Even the stylus disappeared.

It's really, really, weird how minimalism and tablets became so suddenly conjoined when a company with a reputation for a minimalist design aesthetic sold a shitload of units.

Of course you won't see devices like the Crunchpad[1] or the Touchbook[2] on those kinds of lists. Just like how other devices similar to later Apple products, like the Sony Vaio X505[3], Neonode N1[4] or Palm Tx[5], seems to become convienently forgotten in similar lists. But when they are actually remembered someone will come along and redefine the argument in Apples favor anyway, so what does it matter really...

[1] http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-protot... [2] http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/touchbook/ [3] http://www.zdnet.co.uk/reviews/ultraportables/2004/09/02/son... [4] http://www.gsmarena.com/neonode_n1-391.php http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ru2GjBTHRY [5] http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=8140

It's because the advent of cheap capacitive touch screens made stylus free operation possible. Before that resistive screens were what we had to work with.

Occam's Razor applies here, so no.

great, apple deserves much credit for proving this minimalistic approach.

but it doesn't deserve a monopoly of any duration on minimalism.

if design has merit beyond branding, then it should be valid for anyone to choose a proven design. it won't necessarily be innovative, but that's besides the point.