It makes more sense in the context of the top post referencing how narrow design patents are. It also makes more sense to think of them as being more about branding/trademark than patent.
So it's novel in the sense that nothing previously looked literally like an iPad. That narrow level of novelty also defines the narrow scope of the protection.
But this design patent would still make sense (I mean I'd still fight myself to do, but eventually I'll settle with that) if all the lines were unbroken in that. But as you can see, the only solid line there is the rounded rectangle. That means, they've got exclusive design right to make tablets with rounded rectangles. What am I missing (a genuine question).
So it's novel in the sense that nothing previously looked literally like an iPad. That narrow level of novelty also defines the narrow scope of the protection.