Apple uses most of the same components as everyone else, but not exactly identical and not always in standardized configurations. They are doing the work of coming up with solid, profitable, and interesting combinations of mostly-pre-existing hardware and combining it with a solid, profitable, and interesting combination of mostly-pre-existing software. (Some of which they own entirely, and plenty of open source stuff as you said.)
Apple has a hell of an R&D department. As far as I know, their retina display, unibody laptop manufacturing processes, and touch-based trackpad tech are unique to them. It's been shown a number of times that their touch screens are way more accurate than others, and somehow their battery life is quite remarkable compared to competitors as well. With the exception of the display and the unibody cases, the stuff I've listed here all require hardware and software to work closely together to achieve the perfect experience. It's areas like that which the PC makers will always suffer in if they don't change their approach, IMO.
How so? Does Apple do not use the same buses, connectors and the same semiconductor fabrication process? So what's different after all? Their products are also produced in the same China from which Asus, HP and Dell hardware come from.
I think that what sets Apple apart from others is the fact that their products just works, no hackish measures are necessary to make it work in the most common configurations, no headaches to use, the iPod, the App Store, the integrated hardware and software, everything follow this, I would be glad if every company on earth followed this policy.
Making an LCD have a high ppi is not difficult. You had lcds with greater ppi's 10 years ago for LCD projectors and what not. A unibody laptop isn't breaking ground from a manufacturing stand point, it's just specifically shaped piece of aluminum.
The toshiba portege g900 has a ppi of 310, yet it was released 3 years ago. I remember some android phone released earlier than the iphone 4 with a similar high ppi. Many people don't like high dpi due to the pixels being too small and using software designed for 72-100dpi.
Metallic laptops tend to have wireless reception issues, conduct heat a bit too well onto consumer laps, have warping issues and can add weight. All of these problems have been present in macbook pros.
Several manufacturers had high dpi screens about 300dpi in phones before Apple. None that I'm aware of matched Apples exact dpi but then again, they had no need to exactly quadrupel the pixel count in the original iPhone while still being roughly the same size.
As far as the aluminium goes Apple has fetishised their materials choices for a long time and had as many hits as misses e.g. "Titanium" paint that flakes off, White iBooks that discolored, white iPhone 4s that they can't manufacture. Others generally don't bother as their customers don't want or need it. I'm not sure Apple users do before they are trained to by Apple.
Probably because they couldn't convince people that it was magical.
Why did the iPhone run at such a low resolution while Windows Mobile and Android phones were coming out with 3x more pixels? Yet when they increase the DPI game slightly, brand it as a Retina Display, you think they're innovative?
It was a just bit more than a "slight" increase. I think Apple had been planning on being able to double it all along - hence the initially lower dpi. But of course they'll never say for sure.
I meant they accomplished a slight increase in DPI across the genre (not relative to the iPhone 3GS) -- a large number of phones that came out months earlier are within spitting distance of the iPhone 4's DPI, but it just was never a big deal.
"Apple has a hell of an R&D department. As far as I know, their retina display, unibody laptop manufacturing processes, and touch-based trackpad tech are unique to them. It's been shown a number of times that their touch screens are way more accurate than others, and somehow their battery life is quite remarkable compared to competitors as well. "
Almost everything you mentioned was designed and built by other companies. Apple doesn't design their SoC, they don't design or build their touchscreens, they don't build their cases (though they aesthetically design them).
Which is probably a good thing because they need to focus on their core competencies (interfaces and visual designs), and leave the specialized companies to make the specialized solutions. When Apple tried to take a lead on hardware years back, they fell miserably behind.
Apple has a hell of an R&D department. As far as I know, their retina display, unibody laptop manufacturing processes, and touch-based trackpad tech are unique to them. It's been shown a number of times that their touch screens are way more accurate than others, and somehow their battery life is quite remarkable compared to competitors as well. With the exception of the display and the unibody cases, the stuff I've listed here all require hardware and software to work closely together to achieve the perfect experience. It's areas like that which the PC makers will always suffer in if they don't change their approach, IMO.