...the market *is* apeing Apple. Apple however are aping the open source community who had the "app store" idea long before.
I am sure they are apeing some predecessor I am missing.
Or maybe multiple people had the same idea independently (and possibly) concurrently? Or maybe some combination thereof, with independent idea development occurring side-by-side with “observing the competition, mimicking that which works and improving or jettisoning that which doesn’t?” Probably with a dollop of “ensuring you don’t violate any patents in the process” and “paying some Bright Folks to come up with a new angle to differentiate our entry into this increasingly required feature/market?”
Of course, given that any journalist is length-constrained in what they write…all of the above probably would be bad to include in an article. Yes, even online they reign us in. Apparently, if the articles are more than one page, you “reader”-type folks don’t often click through to additional pages! That leads to shortcuts and some brutal editing-for-length.
Of itself, that’s maybe not a bad thing. Seriously, in order to keep up with the pedants around here every article would have to be written like a legal document. Eleventy squillion different footnotes and addendums combined with a density of detail that would make an average reader's eyes water.
All of that gets mixed up with the fact that different journalists have different opinions and viewpoints that get expressed in their writing! Suddenly, different opinions! Everywhere!
Whatever will we do?
Badgers. For the hell of it.