Got to disagree about a board being a board at the end of day.
The shaping (although some look the same), mould, internals, layup, composites, flex pattern etc etc all make a huge difference.
A good example are the Shinn boards - the tech was not there to create them as they are a few years back (otherwise someone would have) and the amount of work prototyping and testing them (coupled to Mark's experience) are why they are so good. They are not just some 'similar' design popped out in some factory and you can tell this when you ride one.
There are other examples of this but there but a lot of boards out there that are based on happenstance and an almost follow the herd mentality with very little innovation - look at happens when take a different approach with the Mako!
How far can TT design go - much further when the technology to do so allows them to be produced cost effectively. They will be lighter, stronger, more resonsive and dynamic. Jsut look at how the design, size and shape have changed in the last 10 years and although they might look more similar over the last few they are vastly different internally - people are genuinely surprised when they try some newer boards becasue thier old (big brand) one really was just a plastic coated plank with fins stuck on it!