Okay, so I read the patent, which was rough going, because it's tediously written even by the standards of patent applications.
I came away from it with the strong feeling that they are NOT actually talking about a computer built into a keyboard, and the diagrams they included are perhaps clever misdirection.
I mean, yes, they do talk about keyboards in the body of the application and they also show diagrams of keyboards. But a lot of the actual claims, the meat of the application, don't say computer, they say "computing device," "made of composites or aluminum," "with input capabilities," "foldable into two or three sections."
That sounds like...
Read the patent application thinking "smart glasses" and not "Commodore 64" and see if it makes sense to you all, too. I wonder, is Apple getting cagy with the language of their patent applications, since those have in the past often tipped their hand about what they're up to?
I mean, I could be wrong, but it's hard to read that application and not see it that way.