The last thing we need is more common sense; common sense is usually wrong. Common sense is what told people the world is flat, heavy objects fall faster than light objects, time is absolute and particles either go one way or another.

Common sense is what people use to demonstrate that fish can't turn into monkeys, or that you can't evolve an eye. It tells you that if loads of people get better when using homeopathic "remedies", there must be something in it. Common sense is appealed to by those who can't produce any controlled trial basis for their suggested "improvements" to healthcare/whatever but want them implemented anyway, regardless of cost.

Common sense and science are not good friends. And if you still don't believe me, go Google for "agw common sense" and see where it gets you.

I'm no lawyer, and my understanding of the details of the case come from a Google-powered translation of the filing from German to Legalese, and a layman translation from Legalese to English, but much play was made of the fact that 6 particular design elements were shared by every generation of iPod touch, iPhone and iPad (together with an unusually thin design (compared with pre-existing tablets)), and that these devices have become successful enough to make this particular design well-established (unlike pictures of the crunchpad prototype and other flopped devices). I suspect (but can't claim to know for sure) that Apple's mind-share elevates their claim to a distinctive brand design, legally speaking.

At the end of the day, I'm nowhere near qualified to say who should win here, but the claims that, were Apple to win, they'd hold a monopoly over every reasonable tablet design is pure FUD. There are plenty perfectly good tablet designs left for others to lay claim to.

Regarding the picture frame, I've not seen one up close, but unless it displays a grid of coloured icons when powered up, it doesn't fit the 6 design elements claimed.

Not so. They'll have a legally enforced monopoly on a very particular design of tablets.

Like the judge said: “There are a lot of alternative ways to design a tablet device, as the market amply shows.” Doesn't sound like he has any interest in stopping others from making tablets.

Ever tried using your notebook in "portrait" mode?

Samsung could win this case easily. All they need to do is prove that the iPad's touchscreen works.

followed immediately by:

Epic

Oh good grief, are there still people who believe in that antenna myth? Go check ChangeWave's recent report: the one that says iPhone 4 call dropping is 0.2% above the average for all phones on AT&T's network. Similar story on Verizon.

Or just use your brain and ask yourself how plausible is the idea that industry leading customer satisfaction figures would carry on regardless if the phone didn't work?

Sheesh, if Occam hung around here he'd have a luxuriant beard by now.

O2 in the UK charge £7.50/mo for a tethering + 500MB bolt-on for consumer tariffs (you can't buy the tethering without the additional data). I believe 3 offer it free, but not sure about others.

Your question: "If you can find a need (not a want) that is best filled by iPad-style tablets, then feel free to share."

I described what I needed in a device. Needs aren't restricted to tasks. If you meant to ask for a list of tasks for which a tablet is best suited, that would be more difficult, I would have to concede. My principal uses of my tablet are eReading, remote desktop access, web browsing, e-mail/forum/blog writing. No one of these tasks is best handled by a tablet, and while one could argue that the inclusion of eReading in the list might mark it out in some eyes as the best hybrid device to cover all those tasks, that would be open to interpretation.

But this is why, when you asked for needs, I didn't focus solely on tasks. What tasks a device can perform is only half the story; how it performs them is just as important. Factors like portability, input method, battery life, startup time, efficiency of UI and so on are what for me elevate good tablets far above netbooks or any other ultraportable. My tablet performs each of the above tasks, performs them well, and in addition meets my criteria for each of the above non-task based needs. No other device does so as well.

But that is only speaking for myself; I wouldn't dream of telling you a tablet would suit your own needs more than whatever devices you currently use. I simply ask that others extend me (and the millions of other people whose requirements led them to buy a tablet) the same courtesy.

I really don't. I blame you for your woefully misplaced sense of superiority.

And smartphones can run remote desktop and word processing software, but they're not very good at it. A netbook in portrait mode is a kludge. I asked for a device that was better for the task, and that ain't it, no matter how you spin it.

Wrong on all counts. Your question was answered even if you lack the wits to understand that. You failed to come up with a device that meets my requirements better than a tablet. And nope, there's nothing play-pretend about the reasons I chose a tablet over a netbook.

Children have such short attention spans these days.

Ehm no, I wasn't talking about "tasks"; you just can't read. I was talking about a tablet's job; i.e. its purpose, which is to provide a solution for a range of tasks. Because being the best device for some individual task is irrelevant to a general-purpose device, and hence a dumbass question. One could equally ask for what individual task a netbook is the best suited.

But for all that you pretend nobody's answering your questions, I note you still haven't answered mine. With all the requirements I specified, what device would do the job better than a tablet? As already demonstrated, a touchscreen netbook would not meet the orientability requirement. Want to try again, or go back to evading with puerile insults?

LMAO, so the true progression is 1. Ask a question, 2. Claim any answer doesn't count, 3. Call the other guy names when he calls you out on it.

Do let us know if you think you can counter my argument; otherwise go troll elsewhere until you get a clue.

If you don't consider combining numerous tasks on a single device as a worthwhile job, then yours was a dumb question. Who cares whether or not a general-purpose device is the single best device for any one thing?

Call me an idiot all you like, I'm not the one who is utterly failing to understand basic principles of worth.