Reading the responses that Google and RIM were able to come up with after Steve Jobs barbs, I cant help thinking about that too famous Chinese proverb: When Steve points at the moon, they cant do better than look at Steves finger. It doesnt bode well for their future. The thing is that they seem unable to understand the very simple paradigm that makes Apple so successful. When RIMs Co-CEO (Why does a company need co-CEOs??) says some thing like "We think many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple", it just shows how he misses the point entirely. There is no company in this world that is nearly as consumer-centered as Apple. The not-so-secret weapon behind the impressive history of blockbuster products that Apple designed (iPod, iPhone, iPad, and currently the Mac itself which is growing against all odds) is Apples unique ability to put itself in the consumers shoes and understand what they will love. So its absolutely the other way around: Apple is actually trying to know the consumers mind and develop the products accordingly. Its Apple whos willing to be told what to do by the consumers because they actually listen, even though Steve may show some (fake?) stubbornness on the occasion. Case in point, the 7 tablet silly idea. Yes, there might be a niche for such devices but Im having a hard time dubbing them tablets. They would be more like PDAs or something like that, and the screen estate would be a huge restriction to their usability. People make a conceptual mistake viewing the iPad as merely a device for content-consumption thats somehow due to the medias tunnel vision that only focused on the idea that iPad would be the savior of newspapers and magazines. Thats not what Apple intends it to be, I mean not only that. Their destination for the iPad is to make it a productivity device and the iPad hardware is ready for that (and even software to some extent: see iWorks for iPad). The iPad can be what the buyer wants it to be, from a gadget for leisure to a full-fledged professional tool. At 7, a device can be the first one but will struggle to be professionally useful. And thats where RIM is being inept with its (not yet existing) Playbook: they claim it will be targeting business users but I dont see how this can work out. If you have to do real work on the go, a spreadsheet, a report, a presentation or whatever, you wont be eager to do it on a 7 screen, while the iPad form-factor is allowing you enough room in such way that you dont feel compelled to fire up your laptop. Hell, you could even go sans laptop when on the move. And that Google guy who doesnt know better than tweeting mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/ platform/ manifest.git ; repo sync ; make to make a point All I can say is Oh, dear! Sure, the point is correct as to Android being open source but did Rubin get the memo that Android is a platform for a generic consumers product and that using geek language is not exactly the best way to woo those consumers? Hes defeating the purpose of being open by using arguments that makes the non geek feel excluded. Steve Jobs tells a lot of BS but he tells it in a way thats understandable to everyone. And it just works PR-wise.