Why do all phones have to look like the iPhone?

Alright, I am coming off fresh from the full review of the Vivo X300 Pro, after catching up on the latest Galaxy S26 Ultra rumors, and also being lucky enough to spend some very limited hands-on time with the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max. And I have a nagging thought in my brain — why is everyone still copying the iPhone?

Hear me out.

The Vivo X300 Pro is a smartphone that can stand on its two legs just fine. It’s fast and snappy, its camera is excellent and definitely in the top group, it has an amazing display with incredibly in-depth eye care settings, and a 6,510 mAh battery.

It is by absolutely no means a knockoff — it’s an original product. Yet, its software is full of iPhone-ish features that just leave a sour taste. Like the new Quick Button — it’s located in the same spot that an iPhone has an Action Button. By itself, that’s fine — but look at how the menu to set up the Quick Button looks like, next to the iOS settings:



Yeah, not only does the menu look the same — the animations are the same, with the same timing and very much the same colors, too.

Then, there’s VivoShare, which is basically the NFC tap-to-share feature. Android phones have had that before the iPhone added it for quick AirDrop. But guess what the animation that the Vivo plays during tap-to-share looks like. If you guessed “exactly like AirDrop” — congratulations, you get 10 points out of “of course it does”.



And do I even need to mention the Quick Toggles menu, which is now also copied by Samsung and other big Android players:



OK then, let’s move on.

Xiaomi famously skipped a number in its phones — they went from the Xiaomi 15 Ultra flagship to Xiaomi 17 Pro Max. I wasn’t following closely at the time and I honestly thought I should cut back on the whiskey, because I seem to be losing years.

No, the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max was named this way to match Apple’s current iPhone number. The Ultra was dropped for the Pro Max moniker. And yes, the design is near-identical to that of the iPhone. Yes, yes, I know that Xiaomi uses the “Camera plateau” to include an overkill high-res, high-refresh rate mini display on it. But after going through so much effort to look like an iPhone, the display just feels like “But can you do this?” statement.



Then, there are the Galaxy S26 Ultra leaks, which are plentiful enough right now for us to know that Samsung is at the very least considering launching its next flagship in a very orange color — like the Cosmic Orange iPhone 17 Pro.



And here I am sitting, wondering, “Why must it all be an iPhone-like?”. Well, the smartphone fandom also seems to be irked by this — minus the people that are devoted to their brand of choice and think that Samsung will somehow Do Orange Better.

To be clear: I don’t mind idea-steals

Ten years ago, I wrote an article on this topic — “Stealing” ideas is fine, “copying” is not. Lengthy read that one, but my opinion is still the same, a decade after. Human “creativity” is often simply combining things that were invented before, into new things that work better when smashed together. Previous inventions were “stolen” concepts, and the subsequent inventions will be, too.

In very rare moments in history, there are some people that are genius visionaries and come up with something that is truly new and unique, be it from an artistic or engineering standpoint.



In our tiny smartphone world, this means that if one manufacturer comes up with a feature that’s useful, it goes to reason that other phone makers will steal it, simply to serve their user base better, and hopefully also draw in some new people from the competition.

There’s a feature that’s super-niche but always comes to mind when I talk about this — pressing and holding on a subject in a photo will crop out that subject and allow you to save it as a .PNG with a transparent background. I use this to make YouTube thumbnails super-easy. Said feature was launched on an iPhone, but is now generally present on most flagship phones.

And this small little thing being present on all the devices that I like means that I am not tied up to using an iPhone. It’s great, I love it!

And, of course, Apple has also borrowed a lot of things from Android and Windows over the years. But, generally, most of the time, let me repeat — generally — Apple puts its own spin on features and functions that it got from somewhere else. Sometimes they don’t even work as good, but there’s a reason why techtubers say “They did it the Apple way”.

Enough going on that tangent.

Can we chill it with the iPhonification of every phone?

I do get it. The iPhone is super popular. By making certain things on your device iPhone-like, you are trying to accomplish a few things:

• Draw in potential customers that may want an iPhone otherwise
• Give your customers features that the iPhone has, so they don’t feel like they are missing out (my example above)
• Express that you have no confidence you can design a product that projects luxury

Oh, how did that third point get in there?

Yes, I kid, I kid, but not entirely. While borrowing and remixing features from a competitor’s product is generally fine and good for the userbase, outright copying it communicates something different.

It communicates you don’t have enough confidence your product can be perceived as “deserving” of its high price-tag unless you piggyback off of the perception that said competitor has built.

Because, let’s be fair. Everyone can make a smooth animation in the software, everyone can dye their smartphone in a wacky color. But what Apple can do better is marketing — somehow, their animations, their color choices, and their “Liquid Glass” are perceived as being the top-tier of luxury.

So, many manufacturers, even huge conglomerates, choose to copy those superfluous things, instead of simply inventing their own. This is not piggybacking on the technology or the Apple engineering team’s work. This is piggybacking on Apple’s marketing.

It all ends up backfiring and, instead of making the product look more desirable, kind of undermines it.

I started this article with the Vivo X300 Pro for a reason. I really like the Vivo X300 Pro — to the point where my SIM card is going in there, and I am using it as my carry-on when I know I will be taking a lot of photos.

But the very first thing I thought when I held it in hand for the first time and saw the Shortcut Button was “Oh, is this going to be an iPhone-wannabe?”. Now, I’ve spent the time with it, I’ve reviewed it, and my perception is “I am very happy that this phone also has an Action Button”. But that’s my job — to spend the time and give the phone a chance.

If I was a consumer, just browsing through phones, would I have given it a second chance?

The same goes for Samsung. The Galaxy Watch Ultra is catching a lot of flak whenever it pops up on social media. I am not saying that Samsung didn’t need to make a bulky smartwatch that’s packed to the brim with extra features. I am saying that it didn’t need to look so much like an Apple Watch Ultra, including the orange strap that’s present in the marketing materials.



And the Galaxy S26 Ultra is definitely deflating user confidence, just because of that orange color leak. Samsung already removed the headphone jack because Apple did it (to be fair, the whole industry followed suit). Samsung added titanium because Apple did. Will Samsung strip titanium now? Will Samsung suddenly decide that users don’t want the S Pen?

Ten years ago, the market was in its golden age — with many manufacturers making all sorts of different devices and spinning off different ideas. Now, the fear is that everyone seems to be consolidating and conforming. One look, one design, one featureset.

Well… in reality, it’s not that drastic or apocalyptic. But every time an iPhonified Android flagship leaks, it certainly feels we may be heading towards such a reality.

Buy 3 Months, Get 3 Free

Visible+ Pro – up to $135 savings on Verizon’s fastest 5G

We may earn a commission if you make a purchase

Check Out The Offer