Wirelessly posted (Iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)
I know many here is hating on this "minimalistic design" wording in the ruling, but I feel that it's the whole reason the iPhone/iPad have been so dominating. Look, every tablet that was marketed before the iPad was complex, some had swiveling screens to convert from laptop to tablet, they all used styluses, most had tons of buttons, some had handles, etc.
I think what's more interesting about the "prior art" from Kubrick and even star trek is these movies/shows were intending to make futuristic devices that seemed desirable but were straight forward. Somehow, in the months leading up to the release of the iPad, every competitor stood around, some even openly admitted they were purposefully delaying production because everyone wanted to see what apple would bring to the table.
When apple released it, many if not most people in the tech-sphere bemoaned that it was too simple, just an oversized iPod touch with comically sized bezels. People said it would fail because it was too simple, and some joked that it wasn't actually really bigger than an iPhone cuz it was all bezel.
Now, a couple years later, everyone is trying to say that this simple design is obvious and that everyone had obviously thought of it before. Well, that may be true, we can't read minds in the past, but apple was the only one with the balls to release such a simple device, I think it's fair to say they deserve to reap the benefits of their bold move.
No. All tablets before the ipad were not "complex" (are you talking design here, or software?), they were not all hybrids (but many were, and to this day still are), most used styluses (thank god), but some relied on finger-based touch as well (either primary or secondary mode of operation). Not all had tons of buttons (while some certainly had, for one reason or the other). Those with handles, well, to this date some still do (because it makes sense ergonomically in certain contexts, and offers protection to the often costly device)
As for your second paragraph, not everyone did. The crunchpad, predating the ipad (afaik), had the very same minimalist design that the ipad ended up having (even more so, i think, cause i dont think it had any bezel buttons). Many may have waited in anticipation, i do however think they were waiting more to see "what it would be", rather than "how it would look". (I could of course be wrong)
Third paragraph: Yes, many still think its an oversized iphone, pretty much because it - in many aspects - is (perhaps one is better off thinking of the iphone as a small ipad though). When it came to simple, it was rarely - as i understood it - related to its design, but rather its functionality (i.e., choice of "iOS" over "OS x" so to speak).
Fourth paragraph: You are confusing things here, as the prior comments were rarely - if ever - about Apples choice of design; why would anyone really argue against that?
As for thought of it before, well - first, we have the crunchpad/joojoo, but even more important, we have an entire history of tablets utilizing the same form-factor (while, quite naturally, of course being varied and sensitive to overall design trends of the time). In essence, the main distinctive feature is edge-to-edge glass. That may have been a somewhat recent addition to the tablet design language per se, but it can hardly be seen as such given the overall design trend of consumer electronics at large (look e.g. at the trend in large displays etc., youll find more than one glass-paneled tv out there, predating the ipad).
If anything, which may or may not hold true, Apple - as i see it - can claim some originality in that they pushed a "dumbed down" tablet (wording is bad, but its understandable). Then again, we had seen similar approaches to that too (basically any non-windows/linux tablet ever reaching the market - successful or not).
Dont get me wrong here. Apple did great, obviously. But i still disagree with the basic notion that one can protect the "base line" in design. In my book, to achieve any form of protection you should do something distinct - which minimalism, per definition, can never be.
p.s. Apple were not the only one who had the balls to release a simplified pad (e.g. crunchpad). They were, however, to date the most successful one.
