As for Samsung, I think you're right. Why not go with them? They've integrated the Android OS into some of their cameras. You can shoot an image, run your favorite mobile processing app, and share it all in the span of a few moments right from the "camera". Time barriers to creativity collapse.
IMO, Samsung entering the interchangeable lens camera market is a recipe for disaster. I have very little faith in their ability to pull it off, because it is too completely different from any market in which they've ever had the slightest bit of success.
The big problem is that Samsung has a long history of building cheap consumer crap that doesn't last very long, with buggy firmware that never gets fixed. They have no need to design for the long term, because consumers throw everything out after two or three years anyway.
Contrast this with the harsh reality of photography—that glass (good glass, anyway) is expensive. It is a long-term investment. It has to be done right the first time, it has to last for the long haul, and it has to be forward-compatible with future hardware for many years, or else people feel ripped off.
Samsung has not shown the ability to design for the long haul, and worse, has shown plenty of evidence that they are completely unable to do so. Just take a look at all the horror stories from people whose Samsung refrigerators have exhibited repeated hardware failures under warranty, in which the electronic brain crashes and all of their food spoils. And this is a company that you think will build lenses that people will still be using in twenty years?
That's not to say that they couldn't cheat—build bodies that are electrically compatible with a more competent company's lenses—but I can't see them ever being a serious player in the high-end camera market, because they have so epically failed at every attempt to build high-end products of any kind every time they've tried..