It's not going to get better, and I believe it's clear how this happened: Tech innovators have minimal protections for their R&D investment and their only means

It's not going to get better, and I believe it's clear how this happened: Tech innovators have minimal protections for their R&D investment and their only means of seeking relief is both slow and bad for publicity (limits to scope of relief, appeals and astroturfing will see to that). It's wildly unpopular on here: but if one wants something amazing then one has to also support broad and fast protection for innovation (which also is something that benefits small innovators.) That includes not acting as cheerleaders for brands that copy IP while positioning themselves as price saviours for the common-folk. Without coincidence this is an opportunity that Samsung has exploited in numerous electronics categories: copy fast and drag out the relief process to either sink the innovator or until a point where the relief isn't meaningful. Copies and near-copies from discounter brands leads to the rise of business models that runs the clock on consumers and only provides minimal revisions; i.e just enough progress to avoid disruption, leading to products that year-on-year seem like the same thing.