A4 chip, A5 chip, CNC aluminum bodies, and Intel sometimes gives Apple a period of exclusivity on new chips. Also, Apple is known to secure exclusive supplies of a technology for the short-term. A nice display technology might come out, but because Apple paid $$$ to have the factory for it ramped up, they are the only ones in the industry with a high-volume steady supply of the technology for their period of exclusivity. Apple has actually been described as a budding monopsony -- the one buyer that can control the market of sellers.
But aside from that is the will to use what Apple leverages. Do you see anyone else going to EFI? It's been around for years, supported by Windows since Vista SP2, and almost all PCs are still on 1980s dinosaur BIOS. Only Sony is also offering Thunderbolt on one specific laptop, and with a non-standard implementation at that. Too many other companies just don't have the balls to make the leaps that Apple does.
A4, A5 - what’s in the chip itself? It’s an Cortex A8 with a PowerVR combined. Most companies pair the PowerVR with an A8. The A5 is similar - it’s an ARM core with a GPU. Others haven’t mixed the two together like that - but not because it’s exclusive to Apple. That technology is available to other vendors, they choose to do things differently.
CNC aluminum bodies? You mean no one else can machine aluminum bodies? That technology is not available to other vendors? Or do other vendors choose to do things other ways?
Please address what I said, not what you thought I said - Apple doesn’t use anything that is not available to all other vendors. Whether those vendors use that technology or not is the vendor’s choice - not Apple’s.
EFI - maybe because for most consumers it adds zilch? How many actually flash their BIOS? What’s the benefit for the typical consumer versus the costs associated? And actually EFI has been supported in Windows since XP SP2. It’s been out for over a decade - but what’s the benefit for most consumers?
Thunderbolt? What’s the market? What’s the real-world advantage over USB 3.0 that consumers will really notice? Why do you want a different, incompatible hardware connector that will require new cabling and adapters when USB 3.0 is available? Will it help the consumer connect to most of their peripherals - printers, scanners, cameras and phones?
All these technologies have been available to all other vendors - they’re not exclusive to Apple. Apple can sometimes buy enough of a certain product to get a short-term “exclusive” simply by buying up all items - but that technology was still available to others, and usually well before Apple knew about it. You think LG and Samsung display groups don’t let their own cellphone groups know of their breakthroughs first? ;)
Apple chooses different mixes, sure - but it’s not exclusive to Apple. It’s just different. That was my point - and you’ve kind of reinforced it.