While the iPhone was clearly better designed than the Samsung phone compared to there, many of the comparisons seem to be a case of Samsung just assuming that whatever Apple did was better, even though the Samsung version was OK. It's like they took everything Apple did and defined it as being better than whatever they did. Granted, that was in fact the case at least 70% of the time.
The point of the document is to look at a competitor, see where they are doing something better, and boil down the feature/requirement, then see how it could be applied. This is the list of the things they think iPhone did/does better - not an exhaustive list of every single thing the iPhone does. It's not a score card. So everything on this list should be something that Samsung sees/saw as a place they needed to improve - hence the bias in the detail.
Could you specify some slide numbers as illustration? I only read through the document quickly but I couldn't find a case where the iPhone wasn't indeed better.
Edit: found one example: the "second hand" thing on slide 49.
What's the point of making an internal presentation of all the points where the iPhone is worse and Samsung is better?
Samsung is trying to _improve_ their products, so they'll obviously compare their perceived products weak points against what they feel is a better implementation.
Sure. The question here is whether the iPhone is indeed better on every point. If Samsung's version is as good as the iPhone or better, and they still recommend to copy the iPhone implementation, then you can accuse Samsung of copying for its own sake rather than to improve the device. That is what TwoBit suggested.
