Samsung Messes Up Galaxy S3 Aesthetics Just For iPhone 5?

Both Samsung and Apple have been locked in legal turmoil numerous times thanks to their smartphones and tablets. Samsung and its Galaxy brand were accused by Apple for patent infringement when the Cupertino-based company claimed that the Korean giant’s Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy S2 and other Galaxy phones resembled the iPhone and iPad in many ways.

Samsung Galaxy S3 going to great lengths to avoid looking like the iPhone 5?

While most lawsuits were thrown out in court, they did cost both companies a pretty penny and as expected, their lawyers are waiting to pounce on each other again.

Now the latest rumors about the home button placement on the upcoming iPhone 5 and Samsung Galaxy S3 have stirred up some interesting questions in the blogosphere. Just after the weekend, the Korean Digital Daily reported that Samsung decided to stick back a physical home button on the Galaxy S3. Now this was apparently after months of running under the notion that there would be no physical home button and the smartphones would rely on ICS on-screen keys only just like the Samsung Galaxy Nexus.

So what could be the reason for putting back the physical home button after Samsung had no complaints about it with the Galaxy Nexus? Word on the street is that it could have to do with claims that the iPhone 5 will also be dumping its home button in order to make room for a larger screen but still keep the iPhone dimensions as small as possible. Given that Samsung has been making display panels among other components for the iPhone and iPad for years now, they should be privileged to some information about the upcoming iPhone 5.

Would Samsung go to such lengths to make sure the form factor of its upcoming Samsung Galaxy S3 phone won’t get locked into a legal battle with Apple? Or is it just a coincidence that the iPhone 5 may be dropping its home button and Samsung just decided to keep theirs in the 11th hour before production for some other reason? Sound off in the comments below?

[via]