Either you're being willfully obtuse, you're unaware of what the market for all-in-ones looks like right now, or else the entire tech industry is filled with dummies who aren't as observant and correct as you. Pick one.

(And while we're nitpicking, the iMac hasn't had a white acrylic chin in five years.)

HP has multiple different lines of All-In-Ones that have absolutely no resemblance to anything Apple makes, meaning they haven't ~chanced~ or ~evolved~ into doing this look. Even Vizio (a company that was dinged for -substantially- replicating Apple's accessory design for their first all-in-one outing) managed to use a completely different finish and different foot profile.

The gestalt of Apple's desktop lineup was needlessly duplicated by a company that has the talent and resources to do otherwise. Argue another angle.

Oh, come on. If you make the same choices as your competitor for nearly every item, that's copying.

These "standard design choices" hadn't ever been common in other products. Were all designers suddenly enlightened at some point on what computers should look like? (oh, wait! they were, by Apple)

Really? Having a centered logo is part of a trade dress? Is it supposed to be 2 inches to the right for everyone else?

And when you place that centerd logo on a thin form factor display/pc, that becomes a violation? Or is it when you make the keyboard silvery in color? Or is it when you make the frame as thin as possible given the technology and manufacturing capabilities you have at the time?

That's like saying Ford violates Toyota's "trade dress" when they combine 4 tires on a car, with an engine somewhere inside, and paint the body red. And the vehicle weighs less that 2000 lbs.

4 or 5 standard design choices in combination with one another is not a "trade dress" when those choices are generic and have been done a million times before.

No, that's like saying that Ford would violate Audi's trade dress if they combine slim headlights flush with the body, a large front grill in trapezoid shape with the logo on top, and two air intakes at the bottom edges. It would.

That's all design is: a combination of functional and aesthetic choices, that lead to a particular look.

Silver wasn't very popular until not long ago. Black was the default, and still is for many manufacturers. It is also currently possible to make the frame even thinner, or non-existent. The choice to make it that thick (and black) shows that it's not about technical limits or 'evolution'. You can absolutely make a computer that doesn't look like an iMac; in fact everybody has been doing it for years.

Indeed, there was a huge production of so-called beige PCs, and nobody complained that they looked the same, since they looked like crap, and people wouldn't purposedly copy crap, now would they? The fact is that Apple products look gorgeous, and they want to keep it that way. Commoditization of that style would destroy its value completely. That is, unless they keep leading the pack in design innovation, instead of trying to protect their old productions, and milk their fan base out of recycled ideas.

Come on, if you covered up the HP logo on that thing you would have called it a iMac. That was absolutely my first thought upon seeing it.

Copying one thing, maybe two things is a coincidence, copying everything is flat out cloning a design without a lot of thought or innovations. Hell, they even copied the finishes on the metal.

The monitor looks to have a completely industry standard bezel width and corner shape that you can find on any number of monitors and TVs. And lacks the huge white 4 inch strip at the bottom.

The stand seems to be a different size and shape.

The OS, the most important part of that device, is completely different.

Now if that's what you call an iMac, then you must also call every PC made a Dell and every truck a Ford.

You conveniently forget the look of keyboard and mouse.

"These are all done 100 times over. In combination with each other."

That's exactly the problem. HP is using the same combination here, the resembles is obvious and the sad part is to give the reason to Apple on this :(