What is "mildly idiosyncratic" about Apple's keyboard layout, that isn't echoed a dozen different ways in every other laptop? And if you're talking about on-screen keyboards, then I think there is even LESS consensus on what is the "proper" layout.

As to palmrests on notebooks, I believe they are more ergonomically-correct; but I do wish they wouldn't get as warm as they do; so we'll call that a "draw".

But I think that you're in the minority in calling Apple's trackpads "Comically-oversized". It seems to be the consensus that, as far as TrackPads go, Apple has the only one worth using.

You do realize, of course, that pretty much all of those packaging choices are not done to annoy you; but rather to achieve a design-goal, usually thinness.

And besides, on the laptops to which you are obviously referring, Apple rightly has determined that a vanishingly-small percentage of customers actually engage in DIY component-level service of their laptops.

And if you take a peek inside of "thin" laptops from other manufacturers, you will find they use the same manufacturing techniques, such as glued display assemblies. And laptops have ALWAYS put components where they fit; not where they will be the most serviceable. Get over it.

As for Pentalobe (SIPR) screws, you just have to buy a cheap hand tool, available from dozens of sources, such as Amazon. Big whoop. At one time, Torx screws were "exotic", too. And Apple isn't the only company that uses these fasteners; not by a long shot. If you were a real technician, you'd know that.

I know of at least one PC hardware OEM who won't likely play that game...

You're right about that!

Ok, that's a ridiculous statement.

1. How can something (the Apple watch) be a "copy" of something if they thought-it-up first?

2. Each of the Smartwatches you mentioned has enough "uniqueness" to not be considered a simple "copy" of the other(s). That's like saying that all mechanical watches that have a "Calendar" function (complication?) are somehow "Copies" of whoever put the first "date" function on a watch.

...And look at Nokia Go... Down the Drain.

Does Tag really think that significant number of people in the luxury watch market actually use Android?

People generally will gravitate toward a peripheral product (watch) that is well-supported by the main product (phone).

And I would be willing to bet that most people that would be the demographic for a Tag Huerer watch are not running Android.

Jus' sayin'...

iCloud service has a Windows Client as well.

Bounce it up to iCloud and back down. Or use something like GoodReader to transfer it directly (even peer-peer) via ftp/sftp, WebDAV, AFP, SMB, http (GoodReader has a built-in http file-server), Dropbox, Google Drive, etc.

Actually, the "It Just Works" (which was never official Apple marketing-speak) sort of just appeared sometime after OS X was released; but the concept was around back in the MacOS "Classic" days. But in that time period, the concept mainly referred to the ease with which things like Applications, Networking, Printing and Driver installation and configuration was possible with the Mac, relative to DOS and Windows environments at the time.

Nothing ever changes on your Android phone because it never gets OS Updates...

Sorry, your calendar needs adjustment.

Community Games were introduced with the New Xbox Experience on November 19, 2008.

The iPhone App Store opened on July 10, 2008.

Now, I don't know about your calendar; but mine has July coming nearly a half year before November. In the tech universe, that's a significant difference.

Nice try yourself.

...and there were internal talks at Apple regarding the development of an App Store even before Google knew there WAS an iPhone.

Besides, first is first. Android fanbois use that against iOS features that they claim were "stolen" by Apple ALL the time, so...

I'm sure you will let me know...

Ah, I see...

But, there's more to all this than simply how many cores. Are we SURE that the later CPU has less THROUGHPUT than the earlier one? Honestly, I don't have the time to dig into it right now, but Intel keeps juggling number-of-cores, clock frequency, pipelining, and other esoterica in order to get the most favorable combination of performance per Watt. And often, as you noted above, it greatly depends not only on the TYPE of application; but also the DESIGN of that application, as to what matters, CPU-wise, and what really doesn't.