Current Apple CEO Tim Cook reportedly opposed going after Samsung for patent infringement for fear of damaging the strong supplier relationship between the two companies, according to a weekend report from Reuters. But Steve Jobs, still CEO in 2011 when Apple finally decided to sue Samsung, insisted, apparently worried that the supplier relationship made Samsung feel too secure and wanting to put a stop to iPhone and iPad ripoffs.

The Reuters piece mostly aims to offer context behind the Apple v. Samsung fight, highlighting Apple's positive relationship with Samsung before the legal battle began. The two companies officially partnered up in 2005 when Apple was looking for a reliable supplier of flash drives for the popular iPod nano and shuffle. At the time, the iPhone and iPod Touch had yet to be released, but were already in development—Apple saw itself in need of a massive amount of flash drives within a short period of time, and likely wanted to lock in a NAND deal with Samsung as a result. The flash market wasn't particularly stable in 2005, and Apple wanted to be able to plan ahead.

"Whoever controls flash is going to control this space in consumer electronics," Jobs reportedly said at the time, according to Reuters.

But those who haven't been living under a rock in recent years know how that relationship has played out—at least on the smartphone side. Not long after the 2007 introduction of the iPhone—and then the 2010 introduction of the iPad—Samsung decided to roll out its own smartphones and tablets that largely mimicked the design of Apple's products. Jobs was infamously infuriated, declaring to biographer Walter Isaacson before his death that he would spend his "last dying breath" fighting Android phone makers on their knockoffs. "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this," he said.

But before that, Reuters said both Jobs and Cook sat down with Samsung execs in Cupertino to ask them to cut it out first. According to "people familiar with the situation," Apple had apparently expected Samsung to modify its designs in response to Jobs' and Cook's request.

"Cook, worried about the critical supplier relationship, was opposed to suing Samsung. But Jobs had run out of patience, suspecting that Samsung was counting on the supplier relationship to shield it from retribution," wrote Reuters.

Despite the patent fight, Cook has emphasized on the company's fiscal calls that its relationship with Samsung as a supplier remains strong. Still, the company continues to fight the electronics giant, even in the US where it won a $1 billion judgement against its rival. Apple is still angling for a permanent injunction against a number of older Samsung devices, but has received some pushback from the appeals court—it says Apple will have to go through the entire review process before asking the court to ban the devices again.