I suggest you actually go read through Apple's patents before arguing about them. They didn't file a design patent for the entire device. Instead, as you browse through their collection, you see page after page of patents for tiny features like those I listed. A type of modal window, for example:
I literally laughed as I read through some of them, because I've definitely unknowingly violated many. It's impossible not to step on the toes of overly broad software patents.
Your comment is even more impressive because you (and/or Hacker News) violated an Apple patent in your comment above. See Apple's lawsuit against HTC - matching text patterns and turning them into clickable actions is patented by Apple.
As a happy user of HTC Android phones, I've been following the HTC case with some interest. After HTC's setback at the ITC, I decided to take a look at the patents in question and was appalled. Since then, I've been banging this particular drum every time these lawsuits come up because it is a perfect example of exactly how broken everything is.
The word "mobile" does not appear anywhere within it. In fact, Apple's implementation example is a Power Macintosh. If you consider that any sort of mobile device... well, your back is a lot stronger than mine at the very least.
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=dLnlAAAAEBAJ&dq=7...
I literally laughed as I read through some of them, because I've definitely unknowingly violated many. It's impossible not to step on the toes of overly broad software patents.