Samsung Does Not Copy Apple At All… Sure


Screen Shot 2011-09-28 at 11.31.42 PM

The back and forth between Samsung and Apple in the courts is getting ridiculous. For months, the two companies have been in the middle of a heated series of ‘copycat’ lawsuits, with Apple originally accusing Samsung’s Galaxy line of infringing on the Cupertino company’s patents and trademarks.

Whether or not Apple is right about all of its claims, it’s hard to deny that Samsung hasn’t received a little “inspiration” from Apple’s products.

Recently, Apple’s own app icons were spotted on display in a Samsung retail store. Other peripherals from Samsung also look to be based off Apple’s designs.

This clever graphic from Reddit takes a look at the similarities between Samsung and Apple.

You get the idea.

Deals of the Day

86 responses to “Samsung Does Not Copy Apple At All… Sure”

  1. Metroview says:

    This is really getting old…

  2. Bitter Witch says:

    Wow Samsung is not imaginative at all.

  3. GH says:

    Can Apple just hurry up and buy Samsung?

  4. superenigmation says:

    Agreed. I never though Samsung would do this. But then again, Apple and Samsung are up in Lawsuit Land.

  5. sohrob says:

    I hope Apple crushes Samsung like the cockroach company that it is. 

  6. adamsaverian says:

    Oh, please.

  7. imajoebob says:

    Since there is no version of Safari for Android, isn’t this both trademark infringement AND deceptive advertising?

  8. vanmacguy says:

    I have Samsung TV’s and love them.

    So. There.

  9. Brian says:

    How is this proof that Samsung is not copying Apple? I figure this is proof..

  10. Michael Mulhern says:

    Galaxy Tab is so much yesterday’s iPad killer.  Let’s just go and have a mango smoothie.

  11. Gunnar says:

    affffff, i like apple, and i thik that thi is copy, samsung suck´s, theri products are trash…

  12. BeFoolisH says:

    The first picture comes from italy…the only place where these kind of things can happen
    (yeah i’m italian..:s )

  13. Kaboi says:

    This is bullshit at all

  14. Chris says:

    that’s called ‘irony’

  15. Anipz Raymond says:



  16. gola says:

    I honestly don’t see anything wrong with Sammy showing the App Store logo for their internet capable tv, if anything, they are “advertising” the App store…

    As for the rest, they are blatantly copying Apple as usual, lol.

  17. Sean Heather says:

    …Ya see Samsung are actually paying designers a lot of money for this shit…Those designers should be shot. No innovation at all. 

  18. Leese889 says:

    On the hardware side Samsung does resemble Apple but don’t forget the backbone
    of a functioning tablet or phone relys on OS, surely Apple should go after Googles Android OS, they are the true copycats.

  19. Suckme says:

    I see no similarities whatsoever. Samsung’s design is unique, nice and clean, Apple’s sucks monkey balls.

  20. Filipe Prata de Lima says:

    Mate Im not sure if you know… but Jobs used to go every year to Sony factories in the 70s and 80s in Japan for inspiration.
    And Samsung builds alot of the equipment for Apple anyway, thus they have the same connector etc.

  21. Peter M Ashford says:

    Who cares, you cultist loonies.

  22. Thesexydrummer27 says:

    thats not irony. its called sarcasm.

  23. Ciclismo says:

    You obviously care enough to take the time to a) read the post and b) reply.

  24. Jimmy Kim says:

    So what about apple’s new notification bar? Very innovative indeed.
    These companies are set out to make money, not innovation. Apple started suing due to increased competition (and incentives to sue) from Samsung. Samsung did not sue apple due to large revenue from apple’s purchases, and because of having the courtesy to not sue the buyer. 

    Samsung isn’t the only company that imitates. Apple also imitated alot of technology. Kodac sued apple, Nokia sued Apple, via sued apple, etc.

    Remember people, money makes the world go around.

  25. Steven Zahl says:

    IMITATION is the sincerest form of….

  26. Jimmy Kim says:

    easy money.

  27. Gary says:

    But at least when apple copys, they make it their own. Samsung are literally cutting and pasting their work, it’s the school equivalent of writing your name on someone else’s homework.

  28. ASY says:

    Do you seriously think that Apple – the company that did not develop a SINGLE component of hardware in their iPhone or iPad can call somebody that developed and put together ALL of the main components of their device a copycat??? What was it exactly that Apple invent??? Do you think that Kenmore (Sears brand) should go out and sue Samsung for the copyright infringement for selling their line of washers and dryers????
    Common, let’s be serious!!! Apple is trying to stall the competition through legal battles – because they know that it is too fierce… They are NOT innovators on the market and have NEVER being ones in the mobile device segment… Smartphones, capacitive screens, applications, tablets,  etc. existed long before Apple brought them to masses… All that Apple did was MARKETING….
    The whole situation scarily reminds me of the legal battles and hurdles that the big 3 US car manufacturers were waging on the competition – mainly Japanese – in the early 80s…. Japanese car manufacturers did have the technology, the knowledge and the ability to build better cars for less money – even back in 80s. Americans – instead of furthering their technology, maximizing the efficiency and innovating, decided to start legal battles against the imported cars… I don’t think that I have to explain the current state of affairs and where this approach took the big 3 US car manufacturers, do I?

  29. Jetamorsolo says:

    at least you can see who’s leading the way……….

  30. Moctavian says:

    Wow, you are blind and/or stupid. Innovation does not require making your own hardware components with your own bare hands. It’s like saying architects don’t create anything and don’t deserve any credit for their work because they buy building materials from others and don’t create sit in their basement inventing new chemical formulas of various metals/woods/etc. Based on your logic, Samsung also doesn’t deserve anything, because they build their memory (and whathaveyou) boards with silicon bought from someone else.

    You should also know, that Samsing is Apple’s supplier, therefore they have early access to all the blueprints of the latter. And they simply copy those blueprints instead of coming up with their own schemes for their own products.   

  31. Moctavian says:

    And you think Google invented that notification bar? All that Google ever created themselves was the search algorithm based on page rank. That’s it. Everything else they have was simply bought from other companies. Somehow, all you red-eyed apple haters gladly forget about such things when you see something Apple didn’t create themselves from scratch.

    Why would Samsung sue Apple? Apple legitimately buys hardware components from them. There’s no law for sharing your revenue with your supplier, unless it’s said otherwise in the contract. Samsung, on the other hand, constantly violates their manufacturing partner agreement by disclosing information about future Apple products, not to mention by taking advantage of that information for their own profit.

  32. Moctavian says:

    The key word is “inspiration” — not “plagiarism”.

  33. Moctavian says:

    You don’t see anything wrong with it? How about the fact that App Stores available on Apple devices only?

  34. Moctavian says:

    There’s also no version of App Store for Android. Or Windows, or Linux, or anything else, for that matter.

  35. Jimmy Kim says:

    So as long as Apple copies something, but makes it look different, it’s legal? Like the new notification center for iOS5?

  36. ASY says:

    Octavian, I am not blind, nor would I consider myself stupid…
    Firstly, whenever comparing Apple to an architect, keep in mind that I don’t believe that there will be such an arrogant and stupid architect – in today’s world, that would come out and say that others have to stop using a pencil – because that is the idea that belongs to them….
    Secondly, Samsung “provides some of the phone’s most important components: the flash memory that holds the phone’s apps, music and operating software; the working memory, or DRAM; and the applications processor that makes the whole thing work. Together these account for 26%…” (…. With that in mind – you are still trying to claim that the “architect” can patent a brick (developed by someone ELSE – NOT the “architect” in their “basement”) and prevent the whole industry from building houses???
    Lastly, Samsung is not JUST an Apple supplier… Samsung is an R&D powerhouse!!! They ARE the ones that “sit in their basement inventing”… Hence, Apple decided to go with Samsung as their main supplier…
    In summary – calling Samsung a copycat – based on the fact that the hardware looks similar, is indeed stupid and shortsighted. Samsung are THE inventors of this hardware!!!

  37. sebzar says:

    If Apple provides Samsung with blueprints of their upcoming designs then Apple is very, very stupid or at least should have an agreement, black on white with Samsung on never making anything that is clearly based on those blueprints. I really doubt any company showing another company their blueprints in full detail. 

  38. J says:

    It is harder to go after Google, as Google is not actually selling much (Nexus anyone?). How does Apple go to the Australian, Dutch, German, etc. courts and ask those countries to ban the import of Google products? The solution would be to import those phones and tablets without Google products, then install the Google products via a software or firmware update. It is better to go after products that customs agents can put their hands on, and destroy with axes.

  39. J says:

    IIRC, Apple tried to trademark “App Store” and was denied? Samsung just took it to the next step: If “App Store” is generic, then the App Store Icon must be generic, too!!!

    Besides, Samsung isn’t copying Apple, Samsung is copying Microsoft (as in “Redmond, start your photo-copiers”). That’s why Samsung is paying Microsoft for every Android device, in addition to everything else, Samsung is licensing Microsoft’s photo-copying process!

  40. Paul Bergum says:

    Apple just markets, doesn’t invent? If Apple never made the iphone and ipad, Samsung would have already brought us the galaxy tab? You are truely delusional. Your own post reveals your ignorance and denial of truth. I can’t believe you’re not embarrassed by such a post. You are making a public idiot of yourself.

  41. Paul Bergum says:

    Apple’s subcontracting the manufacturing of their designs doesn’t give those companies the right to use or copy those designs and rebrand them. In fact most criticised the ipad when it was announced until they saw how well it was selling and then everyone did a 180 degree change and the race was on to see how quickly it could be copied. May these compansies be exposed for what they are and i hope this sends a clear message to anyone else that does the same.

  42. Abc says:

    If Samsung is going to shamelessly copy Apple design like this, they should at least write in fine print “Designed by Apple in California” on everything they make. Kinda like you have to put references when you write essay at university. Oh well, maybe only some of us went!

  43. Paula says:

    Agreed!  That would put an end to this nonsense.

  44. Robyn says:

    Crude language says a lot about a person’s level of reasoning and intelligence!  What exactly did your post contribute to the thread (save for this one)?

  45. Paulr says:

    Have you ever heard of intellectual property?  Copyright law? The notion that Apple invented nothing pertaining to cell phones is about as nonsensical as saying the Earth is flat or the Sun revolved around it.

  46. Paulr says:

    Have you ever heard of intellectual property?  Copyright law? The notion that Apple invented nothing pertaining to cell phones is about as nonsensical as saying the Earth is flat or the Sun revolved around it.

  47. Aleyva says:

    Samsung should show a bit of creativity and make their own designs, it is ridiculous that they are doing this, Apple is 100% right to defend its designs.

  48. Droopycom says:

    The enclosure of every iphone, ipad, mac, apple TV, is fully designed and developed by Apple. Thats a lot of hardware.
    The circuit boards in all those products are pretty all designed and developed by Apple. Thats a lot of hardware.
    The power adapters are designed by Apple, more hardware.
    The connectors, specific Apple designs, more hardware.

    And now, the main CPU they use in iOS devices are designed by Apple. 

    The only thing that Apple does not do, that Samsung does, is be its own foundry for its CPUs.

    Kenmore just license and rebrand other manufacturer products. This is completely different.

    Smartphone mostly sucked before Apple. The technology was there, but nobody knew how to use touch screen properly. Apple just figured out how to make it work. If that’s not innovation, then I don’t really care about innovation.
    Same for tablets. It speaks even more highly of Apple that a lot of the technology was already out there, and that a lot of big companies had the chance to use it before Apple did, but those other guys simply didn’t figure out what to do with all that technology and make it work for users.

  49. Tanyce says:

    LOL. i sure packing, connectors and adapters are ways of same manufacturer manufacted their products. but i dun see how the voice recorder can be deem as copied. dun seems same to me.  

  50. peteywheats says:

    Samsung Trolls are out tonite

  51. JohnDoey says:

    Then you should look again, and also look at some other recording apps and see that there are about 1 million ways to make one.

    Both of these apps have a microphone photo, both have 2 buttons: Record, and List. Both buttons even use the same icons. However, they did switch them from left to right for originality. Both have a VU meter above the buttons. That is an app and its clone.

    You know, defending copying is easy if you are someone who has never made something. Try making something.

  52. JohnDoey says:

    Everything you said is total BS.

    First of all, the iPhone hardware is only 1% or less of the device. But Apple designed every bit of the hardware. The SoC is an Apple A5. Even the chip that talks to the network was co-developed by Qualcomm and Apple. The antenna was designed by Apple. The enclosure was designed by Apple. The coating on the glass was designed by Apple to feel exactly right under the fingers. The touch sensors are not off-the-shelf, they are Apple designed, and they use double the voltage and have other features that make them more sensitive than other screens. The size of the screen was designed by Apple, as well as the number of pixels on it. The form factor was completely invented by Apple, a full-face multitouch phone with virtual keyboard and rubber band animations and other physics. Apple even makes their own power adapters, which most of their competitors do not.

    Second, software is the bulk of the device, and it is all made by Apple. The xnu kernel in iPhone is the same as the Mac, it is the same kernel that was in NeXT, that ran the system that was used to create the World Wide Web in 1991, using Xcode developer tools, created by Apple. QuickTime is from Apple, 1992. CoreGraphics, CoreAudio, CoreMIDI, CoreText and so on are all Apple developed. Everything you see on screen is a PDF applied to an OpenGL surface, all of which was developed by Apple in the late 1990’s. Even the ridiculous knock on Apple that some components of OS X are open source falls flat, because the most-significant open source parts are Apple-run open source projects WebKit, LLVM, Clang, Bonjour. WebKit is used by 75% of mobiles that access the Web. Samsung uses Apple WebKit. Apple gave it to the world, and Samsung said thanks for that, we will also take your designs. We don’t even want to bother designing our own phone around the browser you gave us.

    So your argument that Apple isn’t creative or original enough is laugh out loud stupid. I hope you were wearing a red rubber nose and clown makeup when you wrote it.

    Apple is just doing what Calvin Klein does when a shirt he designed ends up in another store with the label Calvin Clone. What Rolex does to Romex. APPLE IS REQUIRED TO DEFEND THEIR DESIGNS BY LAW. If Apple does not, they become essentially open source, anyone can use them. So Apple’s only options are to defend their original designs, or become a free design resource for the world’s technology people. That is not practical.

    You can go ahead and copy the iPhone all you want. You can make one out of clay, or make an iPhone stuffed toy, or make a fully-functional version out of spare parts you bought on the Internet. However, you cannot duplicate them a million times and sell them in phone stores as your original work. That is basic. You can make a painting of a smiling woman, but you cannot copy the Mona Lisa pixel for pixel and say it is yours. We all know it is the f’ing Mona Lisa. We have seen it, doofus. Same with iPhone.

  53. JohnDoey says:

    “Samsung” is just a parent company that contains what are essentially separate child companies, which are much more separate than we would expect in the US. Samsung is sort of a collective of companies that work together, but also work separately. There is one company that makes phones, and there is another company that makes SoC’s. The phone company does not even always use Samsung SoC’s, the SoC part has to bid on that business just like anybody else. In fact, the phone part makes a lot of phones with Qualcomm SoC’s in them.

    Apple contracted with the company that makes SoC’s and yes, there was an agreement that they would not share Apple IP with the other company that makes phones. However, they did do that. A former Samsung executive has already admitted in court to doing that while working for Samsung. That is at least part of why Apple A6 will be the first Apple SoC that is not fabbed by Samsung.

  54. JohnDoey says:


  55. JohnDoey says:

    No. Companies set out to make products, which then hopefully also make them money. Money is not the primary purpose of business. Money is the primary purpose of crime. You rob a bank solely for the money. You build phones to build phones and the money enables you to build more and better phones and feed your family while you are doing it. If all you are interested in is money, then making stuff is WAY TOO HARD. Much easier just to steal the money.

    So what you see here is Apple is making phones in order to make phones, and the money is functional thing, like blood pumping through veins, carrying oxygen. The money is just a way to keep making phones. (Steve Jobs said something like, “we make products, and if people buy our products, we get to come back to work tomorrow and make more products.”)

    What you see with Samsung is purely money-motivated. There is no other reason to copy a Gucci bag or Ralph Lauren shirt or Apple phone. That is because it is CRIME. That is why Apple is suing.

    I’m sorry you weren’t taught ethics. Unfortunately, you are not alone.
    As for Apple’s notifications being like some other implementations, if anyone feels they were ripped off, they can sue Apple. But you know why they won’t? Because whoever they may be, they know they already took more interface features from Apple than Apple took from them, because nobody has created more of the interface features that we take for granted than Apple. They created drag and drop, overlapping windows, pull-down menus, desktop icons, the Trash, and that is just the Mac and only after they hired the team from Xerox and bought the GUI IP from Xerox.Every PC interface is based on the Mac. Every PDA and early smartphone was based on Newton. Every modern smartphone is based on iPhone. Every modern media player is based on iPod.So yes, once in a while, Apple gets a little something back. That doesn’t at all excuse counterfeiting Apple’s products and selling them as your own. It’s not even in the same league. If Apple were sued successfully for Notifications then they could fix that with a software update. There is nothing that can be done to change the Samsung products into original designs.

  56. JohnDoey says:

    Lots of people care about ethics.

  57. JohnDoey says:

    No, there is no “Google Android” consumer product.

    The Android that is on Samsung phones is “Samsung Android.” Samsung is the sole manufacturer, they take all of the liability and responsibility for the entire phone product, including hardware and software. Google specifically does not take any responsibility, that is in the software license. That is part of the game that Google and Microsoft are playing with outsourced hardware manufacturing. They are putting liability for copying onto the hardware maker. That is why HP signs their name to Microsoft PC’s, and Samsung signs their name to Google phones. So the courts know who to serve a subpoena to: HP or Samsung.

    So if there is a feature of “Android” that infringes on your work, you don’t sue Google, you sue Samsung, HTC, etc. They are the manufacturers of Android. Google is just the maker of an open source project.

    Notice that Microsoft went to Samsung and said “you are infringing on our patents in your products” and all of the features were software features. Samsung agreed to pay millions per year to Microsoft over that. Google had nothing to do with it.

  58. JohnDoey says:

    No, there is no “Google Android” consumer product.

    The Android that is on Samsung phones is “Samsung Android.” Samsung is the sole manufacturer, they take all of the liability and responsibility for the entire phone product, including hardware and software. Google specifically does not take any responsibility, that is in the software license. That is part of the game that Google and Microsoft are playing with outsourced hardware manufacturing. They are putting liability for copying onto the hardware maker. That is why HP signs their name to Microsoft PC’s, and Samsung signs their name to Google phones. So the courts know who to serve a subpoena to: HP or Samsung.

    So if there is a feature of “Android” that infringes on your work, you don’t sue Google, you sue Samsung, HTC, etc. They are the manufacturers of Android. Google is just the maker of an open source project.

    Notice that Microsoft went to Samsung and said “you are infringing on our patents in your products” and all of the features were software features. Samsung agreed to pay millions per year to Microsoft over that. Google had nothing to do with it.

  59. JohnDoey says:

    No, they do not have designers. That is the problem.

    Most tech companies do not have designers. They have teams of engineers that are lead by a product manager, not designer. They are in a design vacuum, and so they steal features from existing products. There is a history of putting tech in a beige or black metal box and screwing it together and grunting like a gorilla.

    What is going on now is Apple is teaching these copycat companies that it is cheaper to hire designers before you make a product than it is to hire lawyers after you make a product. That is exactly how copyright and patent laws are supposed to work. Business people can now put a dollar value on design, because investing in original design is what keeps you out of the courtroom, and what enables you to have a new, unique, hit product.

    The other reason to sue is to punish criminals who are only in it for the money, and just go around ripping other people off, then you have to sue them so that they lose that ill-gotten money in court. So that criminals cannot enter your industry and rip you off and fool your customers and destroy the whole market.

  60. JohnDoey says:

    App Store runs only on Apple branded devices. Apple doesn’t need Samsung’s charity advertising anyway. Being seen in public with Samsung is embarrassing after their descent into counterfeiting.

  61. JohnDoey says:

    Yeah, it is sad. Samsung was supposed to be a Sony, not a Romex.

  62. Noneya Jewboy says:

    Face it, apple ran out of ideas for phones and seen that every one is kicking their asses and are now sueing like crazy. I think iOS5 proves that. Apple is well known for stealing ideas. So don’t try to make them look like angel’s people.  Plus, Samsung made a phone in 2006 that looked just like the iphone and a year later Apple releases the iphone… so who is really copying who?

  63. mjsharpe says:

    If we look at this objectively that’s clearly a trade show stand, not a Samsung store so the Apple icons were probably not put up by Samsung – some boxes and a cable with a plug at each end, but way to troll Alex.

  64. k.u says:

    clearly they made it better than samsung could ever do.

  65. Justbowlinm8 says:

    Apple bought FingerWorks, which is the only reasons we have multitouch capacitive touchscreens (read: smartphones and tablets are shit without these). Fuck off

  66. Neif says:

    Dude, Seriously the only thing I will admit to is the idea. It is obvious samsungs recorder does seem to be like apple’s. But not the way you want to make it seem. It is not a clone though it follows the same creative process. Though since apple came out with it first then we can say they copied apple. But Technically if you are looking at the two apps: Apple recording button is not only round but on the right. Samsungs is the built from from android and it is on the left, right under ones thumb(technically best place to have it unless you are a lefty.)

  67. Email says:

    Bitch Please!

  68. Molaki980 says:

    Wow, You’ve been reading as badly sourced opinions as your own. A- Apple’s arse aint getting kicked don’t know where you got that from. B- iOS 5 is amazing there is nothing else on the market which offers anywhere near as many features in such a productive fashion. & C, The phone your talking about that came out in 2006 looks as closely related to a 2004 Motorolla then it does to the iPhone, so I wouldn’t go voicing your opinions if you have no idea what you are talking about in the first place. Look like your the one copying here, do some real research instead of skimming 2-3 web articles and voicing it here.

  69. lee says:

    mofo please, just because we Korean like eat dog that doesn’t mean we can’t design our own craps.

  70. ryan baptista says:

    oh wow when he opened the box there was… the product! This is an outrage! How could Samsung blatantly copy Apple by putting their product RIGHT into their box?!

  71. sashundera says:

    sooo stupid and fake facts ,gtfo apple fanboy

  72. Jbrunley says:

    And lets not forget the notification bar, and the batteries look awfully alike……(I think) 
    Tabbed browsing, and cloud syncing……All on Samsung before Apple. 

  73. John Doe says:

    You’re giving Apple credit they don’t deserve:
    PDF was developed by Adobe.
    OpenGL was developed by Silicon Graphics.
    LLVM was developed by University of Illinois.
    Although WebKit was started by Apple, it was based on Konqueror’s KHTML libs, and Samsung, Google and some others have also been involved in the development.

    You probably also believe that the mouse and graphical UI was an Apple invention (it was stolen from Xerox).

  74. John Doe says:

    “If Apple never made the iphone and ipad, Samsung would have already brought us the galaxy tab?”
    Of course they wouldn’t. Apples marketing has created the demand for tablets. Without apples money, it would be Amazon leading the tablet market.

  75. BobFTW says:

    Too bad the iphone is a copy of the Prada phone and you forgot about Steve Jobs stealing of Jeff Han’s multi-touch technology.

  76. Matías says:

    nonono, you’re missing the point.
    Historically, companies have wrapped products into bags and cartons, and when the user opened the box, a wreck of plastic bags was found. I “moved” to Apple in 2004 (I can’t speak about how it was before that), and products came right in the box with just a plastic film covering them. No bags, but a slim nice little box containing manuals, and a dedicated compartment for wires and powerbricks. That’s Apple. Now, go back in time, and remember what you found when you opened a discman from samsung or sony, or anything from any other company.

  77. ihavenokia says:

    u can make a call with samsung :o OMG what a iPhone clone

  78. BobFTW says:

     But the iphone looks an awful lot like the LG Prada and the user interface including the icons are a total rip off.

  79. BobFTW says:

    Apple’s naming of the entire line of i-Products is a rip off from iAudio CW100 who came out with an mp3 player a year before the iPod. Then Apple has the gall to call them copycats. That is Apple.

  80. Eegahn says:

     Actually iMac came out before iAudio, but I know what you mean Apple steals a lot.

  81. Dkeisle Lsivotw says:

    here’s a source that’s actually reliable, you can’t copy apple if you are making their products for them.… 

  82. norman moose says:

    Am just waiting for Apple to claim sole rights over the use of a rectangle.

  83. Loerps says:

    I guess then that Ford is copying Chevy and every other American car manufacturer is copying both of them.  After all, most of their passenger cars are so much alike – they have 4 tires, one trunk, one engine (mounted in the front, no less), white headlights, red taillights, and – holy mackeral – the steering wheels are all on the same side!

    There are many examples of products that are made by competing companies and look nearly identical.  I suppose competing dairy companies should sue each other because they sell their milk in similar-sized containers and use the same color codes to indicate milkfat content.

    It’s interesting that the Apple fan base holds all Apple products up for such high adoration and then whines when they are imitated.  You don’t expect intelligent companies to imitate failure, do you?  Get a grip.

  84. Jeffrey Preil says:

    I agree, although it’s stupid that Samsung would advertise for Apple in their own store. Not great business.

  85. hankhank96 says:

    Ugh you all are absurd. Samsung does NOT have any retail stores where they showcase their own mobile devices. This picture was taken in a store that sells Samsung along with other manufacturers’ products and was simply photographed in front of a wall containing application icons. In fact, most of those other icons are iOS specific as well, leading me to believe that this store sells iPhones and iPads as well. Calm down, children.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *