I thought there was a good understanding of this and acceptance that Samsung Display and Semiconductor were good (including a good relationship with Apple) as compared to their electronics/mobile division that has earned them the copycat reputation (not such a good relationship with Apple or other companies such as Dyson). However, it appears what I thought and reality may be different.
Since Apple is such a large customer, I would be surprised if there wasn't a dedicated internal team at Samsung (display and semiconductor) for Apple. It's possible Apple has altered the wording of their contracts with Samsung to penalize any leaking of info between divisions after the issues they've had. Samsung is a good component manufacturer for Apple and one them seem to have to keep going back to even when they try to scale back their portion of manufacturing so I think it will be hard to stop working with them at all.
Why not do both? Companies compete in one area while cooperating in another all the time. Apple and IBM were competitors in the PC market, and then cooperated on the PowerPC architecture (with Motorola, who competed with IBM in workstation and server processors, then cooperated on PPC and then competed on embedded processors). All the major memory vendors compete with each other and are part of JEDEC, where they cooperate on defining memory standards.
The idea that giant companies view each other as "friends" and "enemies" is generally not accurate. Companies have 'interests' – if working with another company (or another division within a company) furthers those interests they will do so.
Samsung is scum
Define a Samsung Troll. I have a Samsung phone and a Samsung external USB HD. There are 2 iMacs, 3 Apple Laptops, 3 iPods, an iPhone and an airport express in the house. Oh, and a dysfunctional Apple SE in the loft.
I think Apple is winning slightly.
Well you are for one
typical example of bad grammar, there are no degrees of winning, one either wins or loses
Putting aside your facetious pedantry. If a competition is underway and has not yet concluded, it is not uncommon, and is perfectly correct to say that a party in said competition is 'in a winning position'; 'winning on points' and numerous other such usages. I very much doubt I have made my last purchase. 'Wins or loses' imply a past tense so are inappropriate concepts.
Don't you mean 'your'? Such bad grammar - tsk tsk.
This is not at all unusual in the electronics industry where IP is a critical asset, and Apple is famously secretive.
It is totally "business as usual" .
Samsung is a huge company that derives significant revenue for manufacturing components, particularly displays, memory and SoC chips for Apple and other clients, who happen to compete with other Samsung end product divisions.
Actual adults run these companies, their bottom line performance is going to motivate decision-making more than childish disputes.
I'm quite familiar with Samsung and Apple Products and would add a few points:
Neither Samsung or Apple make "all of the components" in their phones or own all the IP used. Your suggestion Samsung does is simply incorrect. No Samsung phone I have ever seen is all Samsung particularly Smartphones where they depend of other companies for some critical IP. By the way, it's quite common for OEM to get "custom versions" of ICs that have their name on the package put another company's IP and technology inside, this is particularly the case for some specialty RF, analog and MEMS devices. If you understand that Samsung has licensed ARM IP you are one step closer to reality. Your own observation that Samsung has/does use Qualcomm suggests agreement.
Who ever called Samsung "evil"? Not me. A well-established "fast-follower" (copy cat) to be sure (in fact they were famous for specifically targeting Sony to copy and "beat" in the 90's, it was a well-established objective defined by their CEO) and their typical strategy has been to first license technology to learn and then beat the cost and out-innovate their partners. Again, Sony, Motorola and Apple products and technology copied by Samsung are well documented. That is not "evil" it's the typical "fast-follower" strategy employed by many companies, particularly Taiwanese and Korean, and before them, Japanese. These are undisputed facts.
You are also wrong about Intel, who does a lot of IP licensing including ARM. Sometimes, like Apple, they just buy companies to obtain the IP but they definitely have a huge cross-licensed IP portfolio. ALL major IC companies, fab or fabless have similar situations, very few device companies "own the stack" except for some very specialised deices. Samsung in particular has licensed a lot of Sony IP, particularly for cameras and displays (in addition to now having a lot of their own IP as well).
Apple has always partnered for critical devices. In memory they have always multiple-sourced (most OEMs do) and their standard portfolio includes Samsung, Hynix, Elpida, ==> Intel/Micron and Fujitsu/AMD ==> Spansion, SanDisk, even some IBM/Toshibe in older products.
In FBDs they have history with Toshiba, Sony, ==> Japan Display, Samsung, LG, AU optronics, etc.
No one has all the technology, ever.