Originally Posted by mytdave
Steve would probably have been better off saying "Android being claimed as 'open' doesn't appear to be a tangible benefit compared to iOS" instead of saying that it's "disingenuous" because it's not disingenuous, it's a fact - Android is open. Just because it's open doesn't mean that it's good, bad or ugly, it's just open.
When Google is stressing that Android is open, this carries the implicit message that this is a good thing for the consumer in the end. And calling that implicit message as disingenuous is certainly somewhat justified. So, in the end Jobs can exactly be understood as what you suggest.
When Jobs said, 'we think this is a bit disingenuous', the 'this' could refer to 'open' or the fact that Google is stressing open as if it were a major advantage. If we think that Jobs is an arrogant jerk, we will naturally be more inclined to think he is referring to the former (open), but if we try to think what a rational mind could have meant with it, we will probably believe the latter (open not being a major advantage).
A general problem naturally is that in such official company statements (into which we can subsume Jobs words) there will always be a mixture of facts, general wisdoms, and conclusion, conjecture and opinion. We can always not agree with opinions, conjecture and certain conclusions but that does not mean they are lying or making things up, just that the listener or reader has to pay attention to differentiate the statements.