If it isn't already obvious, OS X is the foundation that will provide Apple their future competitive advantage. Although hardware makers will inevitably try to emulate Apple's minimalism, without a complimentary environment to host the device's primary application (i.e. phone or media player), they will never approach the unquantifiable elegance embodied in all Apple products. With this in mind, expect Apple to continue their hard-line persecution of vendors which attempt to port OS X to commodity hardware, or in the case of Psystar, offering commercial alternatives for OS X. By preserving a common vocabulary for interaction across their devices based on OS X interface, Apple will acclimate users to a standard set of usability conventions. By virtue, OS X's Darwin kernel and Unix pedigree will serve it well as it morphs to fill the Apple embedded universe. By allowing modular functionality, only as much of OS X that is necessary to support the device's primary function need be made available. This OS X strategy will provide both device specialization and familiarity for its users. Contrast this with Windows, which has devolved into a monolithic mess which makes it patently unsuitable for this transition into the embedded space.
Despite the superficial similarity of products trying to emulate Apple, without this crucial component, competitors will only be pale imitations. Just look at the functional envy which birthed Vista. Despite having significantly broader hardware resources to exploit, and more time to develop, Vista on any hardware platform is still inferior to a comparable Mac/OS X system in terms of user experience. The only way to emulate Apple is to develop a hardware/software synergy that speaks to the user experience as opposed to developing either in isolation and hoping for coincidental synergies to manifest. In this respect, the Android platform may become the first real contender if implemented with the right focus.
Oh well, so much for my dreams of having OS X supported on the X300 ThinkPad.
