I'm implicitly wondering whether you think the back side of the iPhone is good enough for Ive, why or why not, and what that implies about the amount of details Apple "sweats."
It seems to me Apple "sweats" details until they don't, and the classification under which the underside of the X1 wouldn't be good enough but the back side of the iPhone - complete with FCC and CE logos - is seems rather arbitrary.
Without a battery cover to hide them, I think those logos need to be there. It certainly seems like they have put thought into the placement, font size etc. Given the constraints, the designers did the best they could.
The underside of the X1 has many "arbitrary" vent holes and screws. Why are they placed like that? Well, probably because the internal components demanded they be like that. The designers did the best they could given the constraints.
Now, why were the internal components designed like that? Who knows. Could they have been designed in another way to make the vent holes look more symmetrical? Yes, but it would probably be very expensive. That's one of a ton of decisions that are made, where someone at Apple said "screw it, lets spend the money and do it the proper way".
So, to me, the X1 backside tells a deeper story about the design process of the product, how engineers and designers worked together to create the product, and how compromises were made. The iPhone backside only tells you that some regulators wants their logos on products, and that some marketer (maybe Steve Jobs) wanted you to feel good about owning a product assembled in China.
To me, the iPhone backside suggests a compromise between aesthetic properties of a "clean" backside and engineering, manufacturing cost, and user experience properties of not having an ordinarily-operable battery cover, and is in fact quite interesting to think about. Consider what would have had to change had Apple wanted the logos off the backside but to still comply to relevant regulations. Do you think someone hadn't said "screw it, lets spend the money and do it the proper way" about an Apple-grade cover that would allow for the logos to be hidden? Is it not interesting to think of why that decision was not made?
I do agree it's interesting to think about. The decision to not have a battery cover was a controversial one, and probably one that was not taken lightly.
I'd be wrong to say that this isn't a compromise, but they thought a clean and thinner design and fewer parts was more important than keeping the logos off the back and allowing the user to easily replace the battery.
If a battery cover was important to them, they would have spent the resources to make it work. Likewise, if a clean backside was important to the Lenovo designers, they would have fixed the ugly vent holes.
It seems to me Apple "sweats" details until they don't, and the classification under which the underside of the X1 wouldn't be good enough but the back side of the iPhone - complete with FCC and CE logos - is seems rather arbitrary.