No, it's relatively specific: The device displays one or more unlock images with respect to which the predefined gestures is to be performed in order to unlock the device. The performance of the predefined gesture with respect to the unlock image may include moving the unlock image to a predefined locations and/or moving the unlock image along a predefined part.
Basically, the patent hinges on dragging an unlock "image" to a predefined location. Every single embodiment and figure in the patent states the user drags an image to a predefined location. That's specific enough.
Lets say HTC (or any other developer) uses the other Android lock screen where you trace dots on a 3x3 grid to unlock it. That's drastically different than the simple left-to-right swipe, but yet the way the patent is worded, Apple can still sue for that. As the patent is worded, as long as it involves a touchscreen and some type of gesture on that touchscreen, it would be a violation of the patent. Drastically limits that "gazillion other ways", doesn't it?
This unlock method, similar to earlier and existing versions of Android, would not infringe upon the patent. Just read the patent. I can't see how what you are describing (dot/pattern tracing) would infringe upon the patent or how the patent would cover it. It's really a different design with different UI concepts.
Apple's design for gesture unlocking is likely the quickest and easiest way; hence, why Android started using it. The curve in the trajectory was what, the minimum necessary to copy Apple's design without looking blatant about it. Google/HTC (and Moto) didn't have to do this and could have kept the pattern tracing or some other design to unlock the screen.