With regard to patents:

The decision by a company to engage in a nasty patent fight doesn't happen lightly. Patent cases take years to litigate and the outcome can be quite uncertain, particularly when jury trials come into play. Oh, and these cases easily cost millions of dollars in legal fees.

On the other hand, filing for and getting patents granted is relatively cheap (five figures) and (sadly) easy to do (witness all the examples of bogus patents). The net effect is that these companies tend to pile up large stacks of patents. Does Company X's widget infringe Company Y's patent? You have to litigate to find out. Is Company Y's patent valid, or does the prior art anticipate it or render it obvious? You have to litigate to find out.

Instead, the likely outcome is that there will be a private negotiation. An Apple person on one side with a stack of patents. A Palm person on the other side with another stack of patents. At the end of the day, if both companies are rational, they agree to cross-license the stacks of patents and go back to competing in the marketplace.

Now, are they rational? Very interesting question.