The logic of this article is flawed and deliberately trying to deceive. This is an article which assumes that the designer will value identical design problems

The logic of this article is flawed and deliberately trying to deceive. This is an article which assumes that the designer will value identical design problems as Apple. Hence they incorrectly argue that since Apple's design is simple, it's automatic to come to a similar design. It's trivial to argue that it's not only possible to solve the problems differently, but that other designers (e.g. HTC) have valued different design problems which result in a different looking tablet, that while similar(mostly for technical reasons), is different enough to escape scrutiny. Not unlike the joke of the expert who knows where the place the chalk 'x' on the broken machine.(http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/where.asp http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/where.asp) Apple's choice of favouring certain design problems over others is the result of their own research and how they want their users to experience their device. Valuing different problems produces different results, e.g. if Apple were adamant that the device should be held with one hand the design might approximate an artists palette or have a dedicated strap. It's up to the lawyers from here, however Apple has been having success in demonstrating that the few differences between the devices are confusingly similar. Samsung's case is weakened by copying, not only the look and feel of the applications, but also the packaging, and even the 30 pin connector which rather than being an elegant solution it's a compatibility choice inherited from other iDevices. To me, as a consumer, while my opinion is worthless in the matter: I feel it's a high profile knock off and something I'd expect to find in the chinese markets. Also it's association with Android damages the Android brand, allowing people to assume that Android is a rough counterfeit.