So they had it out in the courts, with every blow dissected and analysed for the mobile gadget-loving masses around the world, and in the end one of them came out on top.
In a perfect world Apple and Samsung would then head over to the clubhouse for a shandy (Apple would probably be buying) and they'd all live happily ever after. The US legal system, however, is not a perfect world.
When Judge Lucy Koh ruled in favour of Apple to the tune of $1bn, ending a drawn-out legal saga over patents that had rumbled on for... well, ages... Samsung immediately asked for the injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet to be lifted.
Its logic was that while the damages awarded to Apple came form any number of different patents across multiple devices, the patent that had formed the basis of the Galaxy Tab 10.1's injunction wasn't actually one of them.
The appeal, however, was denied.
But all is not lost – the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has now stepped in, and has ordered that the trial court reconsider Samsung's request. Which they will hopefully do quite quickly, because they're due back in court to settle several more injunction claims against Samsung mobile devices.
Does anyone else get the feeling that the US legal system only exists to make lawyers rich?