Share this Story

Why It Matters That Samsung Copied Apple [Opinion]

Samsung copied Apple. There really isn’t another way to put it. Samsung didn’t copy Apple in every conceivable way, but when you compare several of their phones to the iPhone, it’s clear that Samsung wanted their hardware and software to resemble that of Apple’s iPhone.

It’s easy for Android supporters to want to defend Samsung, but the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of Apple’s argument: Samsung realized that it needed to copy Apple to get ahead in the smartphone space. In terms of what this means for the lawsuit seems trivial, but there are deeper issues at stake. How did Samsung copying Apple damage the Android ecosystem as a whole and why should you care?

Since the release of the original Galaxy S back in 2010, Samsung began a steady climb to become the dominant Android manufacturer in terms of both tablets and smartphones. Prior to the Galaxy S, Samsung had touted phones like the original Galaxy (running Android 1.6) and before then the Omnia line of phones running Windows Mobile. Like HTC, Samsung began developing their custom skin, TouchWiz, on Windows Mobile before hitting their stride by skinning Android.

It is important to remember that in the early days of Android, there were not a lot of differences between Android and Windows Mobile. Both operating systems were designed to compete with Blackberry OS, Palm OS, and Symbian, not iOS. Towards the end of Windows Mobile’s life, companies like Samsung and HTC made Windows Mobile usable with TouchFlo UI (later renamed Sense) and TouchWiz. Because Android was not designed to compete with a touch-only operating system, Android manufacturers used skins to make Android more competitive. For example, while the original Droid could not originally pinch-to-zoom, the Droid Eris and Droid Incredible were able to because of Sense (at least in the browser; Google apps like Maps weren’t able to use pinch-to-zoom until Google updated them).

In the midst of Apple’s market disruptions, customers were looking for a more modern smartphone than Microsoft or Blackberry had to offer. They turned to manufacturers like HTC and Samsung to provide a skinned Android experience more like the experience afforded by the iPhone. Manufacturers correctly assessed that Android’s early incarnations were not as polished as they should have been to compete with iOS, so they skinned them to improve the experience. HTC had partnered with Google to make the first flagship Android phones (the G1, the Magic, and the Nexus One), making it the most prominent Android manufacturer in the early days of Android.

Other manufacturers wanted to get ahead. As OEMs realized that Android was the way to go (especially since Microsoft’s upcoming OS would not allow the manufacturer customizations that OEMs had pured millions of dollars into developing), they began to push more of their efforts into customizing Android. Samsung was able to jump ahead of everyone with the release of the Galaxy S, the successor to the less-than-impressive Galaxy.

The Galaxy S had a lot of things going for it. It featured a 1 GHz processor, a Super AMOLED display, a 5 MP camera, and perhaps most importantly, was available on all four major carriers in the US by September of 2010. At the time, the iPhone was still only available on AT&T in the United States. Following the release of the Galaxy S, Samsung began their steady climb to become the only profitable Android manufacturer in the world.

The question is, what did Samsung do that HTC, Motorola, and others didn’t? The answer is simple: Samsung copied Apple while manufacturers like Motorla and HTC differentiated their software. The evidence has always been clear. A quick comparison between the Galaxy S and the iPhone 3G/3GS reveal many similarities between the design of the bezel to the color and look of many TouchWiz icons. To make matters worse, the trial between Samsung and Apple has revealed several internal Samsung documents that specifically state that Samsung was trying to copy Apple.

As supporters of Android, we shouldn’t care if one manufacturer fairs better than another; after all, competition spurs innovation. We should care, however, if a manufacturer steals ideas from a competitor to get ahead of everyone else instead of innovating on their own. If you look at Samsung’s Omnia line and first Galaxy device, it’s clear that Samsung was further behind in the game than Motorola or HTC.

Look at Motorola and HTC devices in the era of the iPhone 3G onward. There is a clear design aesthetic that Motorola and HTC have been pursuing. When you see a Motorola or a Samsung phone today, the design is iconic of each company. While Motorola and HTC may have taken some inspiration from Apple initially (especially HTC), both companies differentiated their software and eventually came into their own hardware design language. Motorola phones usually feature striking edges, tough materials, and blocky software design while HTC phones have curved edges and polished, flashy software. There is a clear path of design aesthetic from the Droid to the RAZR. The same can be said of HTC’s designs from the Nexus One onward (the G1 and the Magic still looked like Windows Mobile devices in my opinion). Samsung’s devices, on the other hand, take a dramatic shift from the Galaxy S onward in terms of software and hardware mimicking the iPhone.

Maybe Samsung got ahead because consumers saw their phones as close enough to an iPhone. Maybe Samsung got ahead because they stole hardware design and software ideas from Apple so they didn’t have to put in as much time and effort as other OEMs did in developing their own ideas. Regardless of the specific reason, it is clear that Samsung not only stole ideas from Apple to get ahead, but that it worked. More importantly, because it worked, the Android ecosystem as a whole has suffered and manufacturers that would have probably thrived through their own innovations are instead losing money every quarter. I have no doubt that companies like Motorola and HTC would be doing much better had Samsung decided to compete by actually innovating instead of lazily stealing ideas from Apple to get ahead. Apple surprised the world with the iPhone. Everyone knew that it would take time for the competition to catch up and then really compete, but Samsung took the lazy route and copied Apple instead of innovating.

Obviously Samsung didn’t copy everything from Apple, but their own documents make it clear that their intent was to copy enough from Apple to get ahead. This sort of problem can’t be solved in the courts. Samsung has built up a brand and a reputation that, based on Galaxy S III sales, will be difficult to tarnish. The reality is, most people won’t care that Samsung copied Apple, but they should. Real innovators like HTC and Motorola would undoubtedly be doing better in the market, and therefore have more resources to keep innovating. Google can’t buy all the OEMs that fail, and even if they could, that wouldn’t right Samsung’s wrong. The Android ecosystem has been forever damaged by Samsung’s callous laziness. Samsung’s brazen copying of the iPhone didn’t hurt Apple nearly as much as it hurt other Android OEMs. Hopefully OEMs like Motorola and HTC are able to out-innovate the competition even more to ensure their success in the market.

  • I don’t buy it. I think that had Motorola left their phones and bootloader unlocked, I would be driving a Razr Maxx instead of a nexus.

  • Boi Dinero

    I’m sure most phone fanatics get caught up in the android vs ios and being that Samsung leads in the popularity race with android mobile devices we can go back and forth all day. For me it America vs Korea product and we win. They can manufacture it in any country they please but at the end of the day its hard for other country’s to compete with our technology/style. And to bit our style you got to pay…lol

  • Paul

    Ok so what did they copy I just looked at each phone on Google that Samsung has put out the Nexus doesn’t look nothing like an Iphone and tell me where in any android software that android looks like an Iphone I have had a Galaxy s2 and now currently a Galaxy s3 and neither of those phone have nothing in common with the Iphone. i mean if they did copy Apple it has to be something in the programming cause I don’t see it in the two phones I own.

  • Catalase

    Ron. The mightiest troll of all. Writes article siding with Apple on Android blog. Infuriate the readers, drive up page views.

  • satsmine2k4

    Coz apple didn’t really have the guts to start a thermonuclear war… they started these patent wars….

  • UrDoGG

    I agree with most of what you are saying. Aside from the GNEX (which I own), I’ve never been a fan of Samsung’s phones because I have always thought that they followed Apples designs a little too closely (like their insistence of putting that gotdamn home button on their phones). Anyway, just stop with the skins…
    More stock 4.1 on phones please.

  • Jay20

    I’m sorry, but caveat emptor, Apple. Plus, you just sealed your own legal grave if YOUR “experts” cannot tell the difference between Apple products and Samsung’s. And functionality DOES matter. “Look and feel” is very subjective.

    But yea, Samsung shoulda gone the route of Motorola and HTC in trying harder to differentiate, starting with the icons. That’s just dumb, Samsung. I don’t think the idea of being mainly touch screen was the problem, but def that silver lining on their earlier Galaxys. Now thanks to Samsung’s idiocy, they may have successfully gotten all Androids called into question. At least the Galaxy S3 pretty much avoids some of the design pitfalls, tho they shoulda not gone with the physical home button.

    Still doesn’t change the fact tho that Apple wants monopoly, and this judge does seem biased. Some of this problem, is a little of Samsung’s own making.

  • yarrellray

    Just because something started out as similar doesn’t mean it was the same. From day one Samsung offered many things apple never did. And the same holds true today Samsung products are just better than apple plain and simple. As far as HTC and MOTOROLA is concerned don’t blame Samsung for their fall of grace Motorola smartphones are just boring they share that concept with Apple. And HTC has just lost their way why because of software problems. People need to except where android is today and that is Samsung they earned it’s place fairly….

  • Apple is a joke. This is like Ford trying to sue GM for making motor vehicles. Get over it, Apple.

  • Charles Bronson

    Okay, so Samsung allegedly copied Apple.
    It happens all the time.
    Get on with your lives.

  • TechGuy21

    i wonder if Benz patented all everything that had 4 wheels how other automobile makers would react to today. i mean Mercedes could have sued anyone that made a car with 4 wheels. toyota, ford etc,.all would be under Benz. Apple cant say everyone copied them whereas others make better products than them. and innovate more. they need to settle and they will. i really dont think US will let anyone win this one. even though US is really biased when it comes to other foreign companies. but this will hurt us customers if either party won.

  • metalcated

    Should I blow all your minds??!! Gee guess what manufacturer name you’ll find stamped on the inside of an iPhone? No really guess? Samsung! and btw… Samsung had prototypes of a smartphone 2 years before Apple released the iPhone. Oh and one more!… Sony actually had a smartphone prototype even before Samsung and Apple. Read its good for learning.

    • What Samsung phone are you referring to? The F700 that doesn’t even run a smartphone OS?

  • BHazard

    Motorola and HTC could have taken over the android market at any time. Unfortunately for them, they continually push their bloated skins that nobody wants (and sometimes breaks bluetooth), lock down bootloaders which nobody wants, delays releasing kernel source code, and doesn’t seem to want to fully provide what customers want (One-X internal battery and no sd). Why isn’t HTC being blamed for copying apple in that design choice?

    The Galaxy S3 gets just about everything right. Touchwiz is minimal compared to Sense. The bootloader unlocked in minutes (T-Mobile). Once Jelly Bean is released, I may not even HAVE to run Cyanogenmod to get my phone to work the way I want it to (but I’ll be running it anyway). Is it so hard to see why they are selling like hotcakes over Motorola and HTC?

  • ccg077

    Please never post another Ron article again. This one is even worse that usual. I mean they are usually absolutely terrible, but this one is utter trash.

    • DroidDoesnt_2

      Truth hurts….

  • Im shocked to see people still in denial… If anyone on here made the iPhone lets say the idea didn’t take off and it was just an idea, you made a few hundred but nothing major and some how some way Samsung got a hold of it and copied that phone and made their own just like they did, making Billions .. You mean to tell me no one on here would have a little issue with that, just a little … Come on … People are just crazy … Im sorry i just wouldn’t write that mess off. i would fight for my idea that i came up with. I dont know about anyone else …

  • Joey

    I couldn’t agree more with the opinions given in this article. I’ve never had much respect for Samsung, as I never thought the similarities to Apple products were merely coincidence. As far as Android is concerned, I’m sorry to now find out that I was correct in my assumption.

  • Sam Shedd

    How can we be sure “copying apple” is the only major factor in samsung’s success? And not the fact the Galaxy S was on all 4 major carriers. To me that seems very important. I remember someone said of my original droid All droid had to do was “have a touch screen and some apps” and it would be a huge success because people on Verizon couldn’t get iphones at the time. And he was partly right. I’m not saying samsung didn’t copy apple nor am I saying it didn’t help them out a lot. Just want to point out there are other factors that played a part.
    Also I have mixed feelings about how much this hurt android as a whole. After looking at how they “copied” icons, it just seems like a sleezy move. I hate that they did it, but really it seems like a normal business move. Their phone icon is… a phone. The notepad icon is…. a notepad. Contacts… a contacts book. It’s obviously all made to look like Iphone icons. Especially when you look at the UI as a whole.
    BUT people here at droid life like to see iphone users are sheep. And really that’s a way of saying someone who has it in their head iphone is better, but doesn’t really care/know why or how. And Samsung managed to grab these people. And now that they owned an android their next phone purchase will be less biased to apple. It defiantly had a negative impact on HTC, Moto, ect in the short term. But I also think that had a lot to do with Iphone coming to Verizon, and the fact they released a terrible string of phones. But if samsung’s only true advantage over them was the copying of the iphone, that is at an end.

  • JMonkeYJ

    i think some people are missing an important subtext in this article (that perhaps Ron should have been more explicit about, if he indeed believes it).

    i don’t think Ron is arguing that Android only became successful because Samsung copied Apple. i think he is arguing that Samsung became the most successful Android manufacturer because they copied Apple. those are two VERY different things.

    the result is that we could have had Android as successful as it is today because Android became successful on its own merits, not thanks to Samsung, but with several different successful manufacturers competing and out-innovating each other. instead we have a near-monopoly in at least the Android smartphone space.

    looking at this subtext, the choice by Google to open up the Nexus program makes a lot more sense. it could very well be that they’re trying to get back to the days of several manufacturers on somewhat even footing innovating. this is pure speculation by me. but look at the Galaxy Nexus: an excellent smartphone, made by Samsung, that owes virtually nothing to the iPhone! of course Apple is suing the Galaxy Nexus design, as well, which is where i think they really step over the line and piss people off. if they stuck to flagrant copies like TouchWiz and the early Galaxy phones, it’s hard to argue with them.

  • anon

    This is the dumbest most braindead article on this site.

  • bakdroid

    Shut up, Ron. Just shut up.

  • onixblack

    I think that if you are going to argue that people who own a Samsung device should care that they don’t really innovate, then I would argue, so should Apple device owners as they don’t truly innovate, they just take a lot of good ideas from other people and add it to thier product

  • blashrrt

    Even though the evidence looks bad for Samsung, I view Samsung as improving upon a product were the iPhone lacked

  • chris125

    Just another reason Samsung should go stock. Then they would crush the other android OEMS even more than they are now

  • Mack Knife

    If Apple is really serious about all this, why doesn’t it simply put signs up saying they are not Samsung? That way people wanting to buy something other than an iPad wouldn’t get confused.

  • Steve Wojciechowski

    If anything Samsung’s “alleged” attempt at copying apple drew people away. I never heard people rave about Touchwiz. Everyone I knew used a different launcher or rooted the damn thing anyways.

  • R Sh

    This is the kind of reasoning that SOPA uses (i.e. had people not pirated the media they would have bought it). If Samsung’s phone didn’t look as desirable perhaps many of their customers would have opted for the iPhone, and their money would NOT have been spent on Motorola or HTC.

  • LewisSD

    You can’t be serious when you say OEMS don’t the resources to truly innovate. We are talking about companies with billions spent in r&d and you are saying they would have been able to develop better phones if their sales were slightly better. Also, Samsung copyed the design aspects if the iPhone not the actual hardware technology. Majority or research and money goes I to actually technology and not the designed. Did you ever consider what they made was really just the best they could do? Or that their strategy is to innovate at a slower rate to produce more incremental up grades (e.g. razor, and razor maxx)to increase sales?

    If anything samsung`s lead in the market has only helped push other oem`s to develop better products in order to compete. Sense when has a company setting the bar higher been a bad thing? From a customer perspective we are the ones who benefit with higher standard phones, and a better ecosystem.

  • SecurityNick

    I’m sure I haven’t read every document that’s been released as this article claims, but I haven’t seen anything that says, “Copy Apple.” From what I saw, it made very clear that Apple was the competitor to worry about. If you don’t think that every single business out there in every single industry doesn’t have sales and design meetings to discuss what their competition is doing and what they have to do to compete and beat them, you’re fooling yourself. The only statement in this article that I agree with was, “Apple surprised the world with the iPhone.” Yes, they changed the game and every manufacturer has come up with their own tactics to compete against it. As we all know, the root of the issues at hand is the US Patent system. Perhaps if certain patents weren’t awarded to begin with, we wouldn’t be in this scenario. Let’s look at one of the recent images I saw that claimed they copied the “phone icon.” It has been universal for quite some time that green means go and red means stop and phone manufacturers have been using that color scheme for send/call and end buttons for years, long before Apple. Now, I could be wrong, but in order for Apple to even have a claim to begin with, there must have been a patent, copyright, or something that says that green logo is theirs. The question now is, should that have been granted. I say, “no.” In order for something to be granted a patent, it must have patentability as defined here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentability and this has obviously been abused and not followed by in the current system, there isn’t anything that I have seen that has warranted a “flash of genius.” That should be the real discussion. And as another poster pointed on here, I don’t think a single person that has purchased a Samsung phone has thought that they purchased an Apple product and were deceived into thinking so….although their recent (and horrible) new commercials might make you think that other manufacturers are “kind of sort of” tricking you into buying a “kind of sort of” insert Apple product.

  • TLDR
    Nice try, Apple fanboy.

  • James Hill

    Boy, Ron is a real tool in this article. Go back to your job blogging at 9to5mac.

  • Akashshr

    I dont think it is very difficult to see how and where samsung copied Apple, but still thats what happens, One copies the other and add one something of their own, Thats how products evolve and become better! I am no fan boy, but okay samsung copied Apple, pay the damaged and move on! Its difficult so see samsung build a case claiming the anti!

  • ak


  • Angry

    All products within a common market will all appear similar. Chevy’s look like Fords, Panasonic TV’s look very similar to Toshiba, etc. apple is pushing this patent assault to the limit and it hopefully will spur a rethink of our patent and copyright system. This is about apple putting the breaks on competition any way possible. In the good old days you’d put your effort and $ into making a better, cheaper, more desireable product. Now you just call a law firm and sit back…

  • Impressive! I lost faith in Droid-Life for not being an impartial source of information. I’d grown tired of the articles that stirred up the Android Fans. The bottom line Android is hurting, because its being attacked from within. There needs to be a focus on quality, not quantity.

  • jeff3yan

    This is only temporary until Samsung brings out their own evidence, a huge document from Apple detailing how they looked at the leading product at the time from RIM and copied them.

  • John Davids

    Hope you have some thick skin, Ron. These comments aren’t going to get any prettier. I pretty much disagree with the entire premise of your “article”, but most of the commentors have said what I wanted to say anyway. Bad form.

  • VellicateAlgid
  • Bob

    If Samsung wanted everyone to assume that the galaxy series was the same as the iphone, why did they spend millions on the next big thing ads? Clearly these were meant to show consumers that these phones were different.

  • frankandsimple

    it’s funny to read thru comments of people who seem somehow personally hurt by the revelation about Samsung being a shameless copycat. More interesting is the utter lack of understanding the difference between copying something and utilizing an idea. Samsung not only LIFTED Apple’s ideas (which still is OK).. they also tried to do the exact same thing with the idea that Apple already did.. It’s not like they got inspired by Apple’s in-general smartphone innovations and tried to emulate them.. they simply ripped off page by page on many of Apple’s proprietary stuff without having the courtesy to even let Apple know.. and they passed it off as their own.

    But then, I completely expect this from a South Korean company. They aren’t much different from their Chinese or other Asian counterparts.

    Go USA!

  • RichFromBX

    Car manufactures “barrow” from each other all of the time. Could you imagine what would happen if BMW owned the patent on bluetooth in a car then sued every other manufacturer that wanted to add bluetooth or went after companies that made those bluetooth devices that clip on to visors…Patents are really a silent killer in business because anyone with an idea can file the papers even when they don’t have the means to put something in to production, at the very least stuff like that can make it difficult to get things going…

    On Shark Tank, Mark Cuban ripped in to a guy because he filed and own the patent on running the cord from headphones though a jacket and then sued other companies that did it…I get the good side of patents and there are legit uses of them but someone at the patent office needs to look at this stuff and think “click on a phone number in an email and it will automatically allow you to place the call…yeah, no eff’n kidding, there’s nothing unique or inventive about this…no soup for you”

    • paul_cus

      That was a great episode of Shark Tank.

  • Ralph Basile

    These idea strikes me as ridiculous. What was the first flip phone – the Motorola Startac? Did every other manufacturer of a flip phone pay royalties to Motorola? Which was the first company to use a color screen? Are they owed royalties? Should all other color screened phones be pulled from the market?
    Apple innovated. They got rid of the styles (or track pad on some phones) and replaced it with a finger touch interface. But in most other ways, the iPhone did what other smartphones did. They copied the function and features of those phones. It is ridiculous that Apple was granted patents for many of those features.
    I am hoping this madness ends with this court case.

  • I don’t agree — at least not for the current generation of Samsung phones. The S3 does not look like an iPhone. Anyone who would be mistaken a S3 for an iPhone would be someone stupid enough to be confused by a fork and a spoon. That said, I hate the rounded rectangular shape that the S3 uses, the saturated color theme, which is also what the iPhone uses — but that is NOT copying.

  • kidheated

    This entire thing is ridiculous. Sammy did copy Apple in some respects, obviously, but Apple (as a whole) is still a little bitch. They whine to the principal about everything. Penalize Samsung (not Android) and move on (touchwiz sucks anyway). Samsung should maybe stop helping Apple fight them by not supplying them manufacturing mats, etc. Apple is like the evil corp in movies, once they’re done w/ you/your services, they eliminate you. In regards to those who supposedly (if any) “mistook a Samsung device for an Apple unit,” you should kill yourselves. Life is much harder than that (and the fact that stupidity like this is usable in court is infuriating). That argument should be thrown out. Anyone w/ an IQ under 70 should not be using a smartphone, hence the name. In truth, this would all be less of a problem if el Googs took the reins and set more strict policies on its OS. There should be nothing but vanilla android on handsets. “Skins” should be either downloaded afterwards from company websites or arranged in a chooser system to be used at consumers’ discretion, not forcibly imposed.

  • Superguy

    “We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.” — Steve Jobs

    Guess it’s only ok when Apple does it then.


  • IMNS

    Since when has Blur been considered innovative?

  • Rob

    On another note, it would be awesome if the trial decided Touchwiz looked too similar to iOS and it got banned until it was changed. If Samsung didn’t want to spend the money, vanilla Android for all! Yay!

    /wakes up

    Touchwiz isn’t that bad, just having a little fun at its expense.

    • Tommy Thompson

      Nature UX removes most if not all iOS similarities that the GS1 had.

  • Rob

    Good write up. Is Apple claiming they have lost sales due to this? I know about the report that some people returned Galaxy Tabs thinking they were iPads, but other than that, have they? Even if it comes out that Samsung did copy Apple in styling, did it affect Apple’s sales? I’m sorry but anyone who blows over $200+ on a phone or tablet and doesn’t even READ THE DAMN BOX and still get the “wrong” product, they are just completely blind or stupid.

    Also, sure, Samsung sold a lot of phones starting in 07 and onward. Has anyone pointed out that the iPhone was only available on one carrier in the US for a couple of years?

    And again, the trade dress infringement – as many pointed out, how can this exist for cell phones but not for cars? Cars look similar – four wheels, an engine under a hood, some windows, mirrors, etc. Same with TVs, appliances, etc. So why do devices get to have trade dress rights?

    • Tommy Thompson

      I don’t see how they can even try to make a claim that they lost money when they had their best quarter ever not too long ago.

      • Rob

        This is precisely my point. And to top it off, their best quarter (if not one of the best) consisted of selling a phone that didn’t have NFC or LTE and had bad battery life (according to people that I know that have it). I thought the iPhone was supposed to have good battery life?

    • r0lct

      Playing devil’s advocate here.
      I’ve yet to see two cars on the road that look so similar that I need to read the name plate or study some other part of the car to tell them apart. If you look at TVs you’ll see most try to have some sort of custom border to differentiate them.

      • Rob

        I agree, I can distinguish cars pretty well too. But my wife can’t and neither can a LOT of people. And I would say the same goes for phones. Sure, you and I might see obvious glaring differences between the phones but the majority of society might not.

        Have you not seen how Hyundai tries to make their luxury sedans more like a Benz? You can’t be honest if you tell me that it doesn’t look like anyone copied anyone in the auto industry. What about the hideously designed 300M? Totally looks like a bad copy of a Bentley.

        • Tommy Thompson

          Hyundai goes as far as not putting their name badge on the higher end models too. So the Genesis would only say Genesis, no Hyundai badges anywhere.

          • r0lct

            But the confusion happens at the point of sale which makes the car analogy not a good one.

          • Tommy Thompson

            That would mean someone misread “Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1” for “Apple iPad” which seems very unlikely. Most likely what happened is the sales associate said “oh yeah its just like the iPad” when what the customer actually wanted was the iPad.

          • r0lct

            I am also playing devil’s advocate in a lot of my posts to combat so of the ridiculous blind apple hate (not directed at you) and actually attempt represent both sides for an actual conversation.

          • Tommy Thompson

            Haha so how many people have you pissed off so far? Lol

          • r0lct

            I think I have a few people down-vote stalking me so I would say its been rather productive.

          • Tommy Thompson

            Mission accomplished then!

          • r0lct

            For some strange reason I thought the outcome would be different. Oh well.

      • Tommy Thompson

        Hyundai Genesis and Mercedes S class?

        • r0lct

          How many people you think returned their Hyundai thinking it was a Mercedes or that it was close enough?

          • Tommy Thompson

            Yes, because people go into a HYUNDAI dealership to purchase a MERCEDES. Look at the two vehicles. You can’t sit there and say they aren’t extremely similar.

          • r0lct

            OK, terrible follow-up on my part. However mixing up an Mercedes and a Genesis is tough to believe.

  • jathak

    I definitely agree that Samsung copied a lot from Apple with the original Galaxy S. However, with the SGS III and particularly the Galaxy Nexus, I don’t think Apple has any claim.
    I think that Samsung should have to pay X amount of dollars for the copying from a few years ago and then both companies should agree to stop suing each other.

  • jnt

    I think Sammy’s success had more to do with carrier availability than anything else – that and strong marketing. I’m sure it helped that it looked similar to the most popular device at the time, but it would not have gained any traction without it’s widespread availability.