It’s time for Android manufacturers to stop treating us like children

Android’s main appeal has always been its numerous options and customization tools. However, Android manufacturers have gone to great lengths over the last few years to limit our options, even for power users. I fear to make the Samsung Galaxy S24 and Google Pixel 9 phones more attractive to the masses, as Android has lost much of its initial allure.

I don’t know why it has to be like this. Android’s biggest strength is its flexibility, and while making phones more consumer-friendly is important, I think we can have the best of both worlds.

I had issues with the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra display

It could’ve been fixed so easily

When I turned on my Galaxy S24 Ultra for the first time, I noticed how drab the display was compared to previous models. Samsung dialed down the panel’s saturation, giving us more natural tones, but many preferred the muted hues, especially if they suffered from eye strain or needed a color-accurate display. I wasn’t in either of those categories, but I didn’t suffer through the passive-matrix LCD panels of the 90s only to have my futuristic colors taken away.

Related

Samsung says the Galaxy S24 Ultra’s washed out display is intended behavior

It’s a display profile adjustment, not a defect

I always thought display tint was determined at the factory, too. I remember old iPhones having cool and warm display color temperatures, depending on which company manufactured the panel. Samsung previously allowed us to control display tint and saturation, but I had no idea it could be taken much further. I was shocked when we got a vividness slider for more granular control. It helped a little on the S24 Ultra, but it really surprised me on the Galaxy S24 FE.

If I wanted, I could change the Galaxy S24 FE’s screen from entirely natural to a futuristic neon explosion. If both needs can be satisfied through options, why aren’t we given more control by default?

Displays are about more than just color

Frame rate control is important

One of my favorite features on the Razer Phone was adjusting frame rates for individual games; some games played better at 60Hz, while others could fully use the Razer’s 144Hz LCD. It was a brilliant and elegant solution from a company that couldn’t be bothered with software support for its phones, and it astonishes me that Google and Samsung don’t offer frame rate locking on phones, let alone choosing which apps get what frame rate.

Even developer options are being pared down, with AP’s Matt Sholtz commenting on how frame rate locking has been removed from the settings menu designed for power users on Samsung’s new tablets. PCs allow many frame rate tweaks to match displays, so it’s disappointing that Android doesn’t provide the same functionality.

I can understand the appeal of protecting users from themselves by default, but I can’t get behind limiting developer options for power users who know what they are doing.

Android manufacturers need to be careful

Sales make the world go round. If Google and Samsung don’t sell enough phones, there’s no incentive to create new ones. I’m not naive; I can understand it’s a business. And I know it’s good business to make front-end UIs more beginner-friendly, eliminating the stigma that Android is for enthusiasts only. Google’s entire Pixel 9 lineup seems geared towards attracting casual users, and giving them the ability to break their phones in settings wouldn’t be wise.

However, there needs to be a balance. Companies can keep providing inoffensive versions of Android, offering few options for novices to get themselves into trouble. But don’t forget the enthusiasts who want to tweak display temperatures and frame rates. Getting the most from our phones through options and customizations was always at the core of the Android experience; I’d hate to see us lose that in the name of mass appeal.