What once was praised for its elegance and visual restraint has seemingly spiraled into a chaotic medley of shapes, sizes, and styles. Let’s talk about why Material 3 Expressive is not just a departure from good design — but a regression.

Aesthetic Incoherence: The Rise of Design Clutter

Material 3 Expressive promises customization and personality, but what it delivers is inconsistency. The overuse of dynamically generated shapes and uneven sizing breaks the harmony of user interfaces. No longer does a UI feel like a coherent visual system; instead, it feels like a patchwork quilt of design choices — each element screaming for attention in its own unique way.

Gone are the days of symmetrical cards, neatly aligned padding, and consistent iconography. In their place, we get mismatched corner radii, an unpredictable blend of rounded and sharp edges, and text elements that float awkwardly with unbalanced spacing. This isn’t expressive — it’s dissonant.

The Myth of Personalization Over Polish

Google positions Material 3 Expressive as a way to infuse UI with brand and personality. But in practice, most implementations feel like a visual overload. In the quest for “personalization,” Google has sacrificed polish. Giving every app the power to look wildly different doesn’t empower users — it alienates them with inconsistency.

And let’s be honest: most users aren’t designers. They don’t crave a “unique” shape for every button or an unconventional corner radius for every card. What they want is clarity, familiarity, and visual comfort — something Material Design used to deliver in spades.

The Curse of Over-Engineering Aesthetics

One of the most puzzling trends in Google’s recent design evolution is the obsession with surface-level novelty. Material 3 brings in multiple shapes, shadow layers, and inconsistent use of color tones, seemingly just for the sake of change. Every element is adjustable — but does it need to be?

This over-engineering of UI components has led to design systems that are harder to use, both for developers and end users. Instead of intuitive layouts and streamlined visual flows, we now have to contend with floating action buttons that look out of place, cards with awkward elevation, and color palettes that feel more like a mood board gone wrong than a cohesive brand identity.

Google’s Design Language: A Downward Spiral

Material Design 1.0 was a revelation. Material 2 refined it beautifully. But since then, Google’s design language has taken a nosedive into overcomplexity and visual inconsistency. Android 12’s “Material You” was a signal of this shift — prioritizing hyper-customization over clean design. Material 3 Expressive just takes this further, abandoning the foundational principles of good design: balance, hierarchy, and simplicity.

The irony? In trying to make everything look fresh and individual, Google has made most of it look amateurish and disjointed.

Conclusion: Less Expression, More Cohesion Please

Material 3 Expressive might excite design hobbyists with its palette of options, but for anyone who values consistency and polish in their UI, it’s a step in the wrong direction. A great design system should make apps look better by default, not require each developer to become a full-time visual designer to make things tolerable.

Google needs to return to the basics. The best interfaces aren’t the ones that shout the loudest — they’re the ones that get out of the way and let the content shine. Material 3 Expressive, for all its intentions, just makes too much noise.

The post Google Material 3 Expressive Is a Step Back for Aesthetic Design appeared first on Techans.

A 120Hz refresh rate offers a substantial leap in display performance, enhancing the user experience by delivering smoother animations, crisper visuals, and overall responsiveness. It significantly reduces motion blur, making interactions on a device feel more natural and seamless. The difference is most felt while scrolling through social media feeds, news stories, etc. than while doing other tasks.

The only reason Apple is able to sell a 60Hz Display on iPhone 14 and now on iPhone 15 is because most users who haven’t experienced 120Hz don’t find anything wrong with 60Hz. But that doesn’t justify not providing a 120Hz Display, or at least a 90Hz Display, for a phone which costs around Rs. 70,000 and upwards. Anybody who has used 120Hz on the Pro & Pro Max series of iPhones will not want to use 60Hz.

Users argue that 60Hz Display on iPhone is better than 120Hz on Android devices, but that’s laughable. At best, one can claim 60Hz Display on iPhone is better than 60Hz on most Android devices but that can’t be compared with 120Hz.

In a market where Android counterparts swiftly adopted and integrated 120Hz displays, Apple’s decision not to follow suit for the non-Pro iPhone series isn’t justifiable. Further, the absence of a clear explanation from Apple leaves users speculating and feeling a sense of disconnect from the brand.Worst, we still don’t know whether the iPhone 16 (non-Pro models) will get 120Hz or not. Hopefully, Apple will get ProMotion to the entire iPhone 16 Series.

The post Does the Average iPhone User Need a 120Hz Display? Spoiler: Yes appeared first on Techans.

1. Underwhelming Customization
One of the main selling points of OneUI is supposed to be its extensive customization options. However in my view, it is one of the least customisable UI. You can’t customise icon shapes, you cannot customise app dock to scroll horizontally instead of vertically, and so on. The quality of Themes & Icon Packs in the Samsung Store is very poor to say the least. Good Lock which is available in selective countries is touted as a solution by many but it has a very poor UI & its implementation leaves a lot to be desired.

2. Bloatware
Samsung has been criticized for pre-installing a significant amount of bloatware on their devices. These are often apps and services that duplicate the functionality of Google’s apps or serve limited utility. Not only does this consume storage space, but it can also lead to a cluttered app drawer and user experience.

3. Inconsistent Design
OneUI has made strides in improving its design and user experience, but it can still feel inconsistent at times. The mix of rounded and square elements, various icon styles, and the sometimes overly large headers in certain apps can lead to a less cohesive and visually pleasing user interface.

4. Heavy System Resources
OneUI tends to be more resource-intensive compared to stock Android or lighter Android skins. This can lead to slower performance on older devices and even some mid-range smartphones. If you have a device with limited RAM and processing power, you may find OneUI to be a burden on system resources.

In conclusion, while OneUI offers a range of customization options and unique features, it’s not without its drawbacks. Overwhelming customization, bloatware, inconsistent design, slow software updates, resource-intensive performance, complex settings, and a divergence from stock Android can make it less appealing to some users. As with any user interface, personal preference plays a significant role in determining whether OneUI is a great fit for you. For those who value a more streamlined and lightweight Android experience, it might be worth considering alternatives or exploring custom ROMs and launchers such as Nova Launcher or Pixel Launcher to tailor your smartphone to your liking.

The post OneUI: Why Samsung’s User Interface Falls Short appeared first on Techans.

Performance:

HyperOS is said to be more lightweight and efficient than MIUI, which could lead to improved performance and battery life.

Features:

HyperOS is expected to have a number of new features and improvements over MIUI, such as a new design, better customization options, and more advanced privacy features.

Updates:

Xiaomi has said that it is committed to providing timely software updates for HyperOS devices. This is a major improvement over MIUI, which has a reputation for slow software updates.

Look & Feel:

HyperOS seems to have been “inspired” by iOS which means the tradition of Chinese UIs, including Xiaomi MIUI, copying iOS continues. Now this may or may not be a bad thing. In case you like the look & feel of iOS but need the flexibility of Android then this can be a good option for such users. However, pure Android fans will surely not like the similarity.

Conclusion:

Overall, HyperOS has the potential to be a significant improvement over MIUI. However, it is still too early to say for sure how well it will perform or how well-received it will be by users. It is important to note that HyperOS is still under development, so it is possible that some of its features or performance may change before it is released.

The post Can Xiaomi rectify its MIUI mistakes with HyperOS? appeared first on Techans.

Durability Concerns

The concept of a screen that folds is both fascinating and worrisome. The very nature of foldable phones introduces a vulnerability: the display. As with any new technology, concerns about the durability of these flexible screens persist. Despite advancements in materials and design, questions about the long-term resilience of foldable screens against daily wear and tear, creasing, and damage linger.

Weight, Thickness, and Design

Foldable phones often come with a trade-off in terms of weight, thickness, and design. The mechanisms required to enable folding inevitably add bulk to the device. In a time where slim and sleek designs dominate the smartphone market, the added weight and thickness of foldable phones might not appeal to those seeking a more minimalist, pocket-friendly device.

Price and Value Proposition

The innovative technology driving foldable phones also contributes to their steep price tags. For many, the current cost of these devices doesn’t align with the perceived value, especially considering the aforementioned concerns about durability. The high price point becomes a significant barrier for those looking for a practical investment in a smartphone.

App Optimization and Usability

While the hardware innovation is impressive, the software and app optimization for foldable screens still lag behind. Not all apps are tailored to take full advantage of the expanded screen real estate. Many apps don’t seamlessly transition from the folded to the unfolded state, leading to a disjointed user experience. This lack of optimization can hamper the utility and allure of foldable phones.

Evolution and Wait-and-See Approach

In the tech world, initial iterations often pave the way for more refined, superior versions. With foldable phones, the first models are essentially prototypes of a groundbreaking concept. Waiting for subsequent iterations allows for improvements in durability, design, and software optimization, potentially addressing the current concerns and making them more appealing in the future.

Conclusion

Foldable phones are undeniably intriguing, embodying a leap forward in smartphone innovation. However, a blend of durability concerns, pricing, design trade-offs, and software optimization hurdles currently hampers their universal appeal. For some, the concept is ahead of its time, requiring more advancements and refinements to fully embrace their potential.

The post Why aren’t Foldable Phones mainstream yet? appeared first on Techans.

The OnePlus Legacy:
OnePlus, known for its ‘flagship killer’ devices, disrupted the smartphone market by offering high-end specs at a more affordable price. Their devices quickly gained a loyal following due to their sleek design, clean software, and a community-centric approach. However, with the exit of Carl Pei, the brand has lost his focus and also its charm.

Enter ‘Nothing’:
The brainchild of Carl Pei, ‘Nothing’ has piqued the interest of tech enthusiasts with its Nothing Phone 1 followed by Nothing Phone 2. ‘Nothing’ seems to have adopted a similar strategy to OnePlus in the initial stages. The phone gets the basic rights, has clean software and is targeted at the ‘flagship killer’ price segment.

‘Nothing’ may indeed be positioned to carve its own path and, potentially, emerge as the next disruptor in the tech world. Only time will tell if ‘Nothing’ will completely fill the shoes of OnePlus or forge an identity of its own in the tech sphere.

The post Is ‘Nothing’ the next OnePlus? appeared first on Techans.

The Pixel Journey

Google’s Pixel lineup has been renowned for its stock Android experience, exceptional cameras, and seamless integration with Google’s services. The Pixel devices have gained a dedicated fan base, largely owing to their reliable software updates and emphasis on photography. They’ve not only showcased Google’s software prowess but also pushed boundaries in computational photography.

Enter Tensor: A Shift in Strategy

The launch of Tensor marked a pivotal moment for Google, emphasizing their desire to differentiate themselves further in the market. Instead of relying on off-the-shelf components, Google took the bold step of designing its own chip, aiming to optimize hardware and software integration. This move aligns with Google’s vision to enhance AI and machine learning capabilities within its devices, potentially revolutionizing user experiences.

Critics draw parallels between Tensor and Samsung’s Exynos, primarily due to Google’s partnership with Samsung in the development of the Tensor chip. The Exynos processors have faced scrutiny, especially concerning performance and efficiency compared to other chipsets. This has led some to speculate that Tensor might inherit similar drawbacks, impacting the overall performance of Pixel devices.

And rightly so. Because most users of Pixel 7 series which use Tensor G2 chip seem to complain about overheating, battery issues and network issues. In fact, most Pixel 7 devices get poor network in areas where other phones have no issues. Pixel 8 series running Tensor G3 is in the market now and while the issues seem to be lower than with G2, it remains to be seen whether they can catch up in performance to Qualcomm Snapdragon Gen 3 or even Gen 2 chips.

Considerations for Consumers

For consumers, the decision to opt for or avoid Pixel devices with Tensor largely depends on individual priorities. Those who prioritize a seamless integration with Google’s ecosystem, frequent software updates, and cutting-edge computational photography might still find the Pixel devices an appealing choice, despite the concerns about Tensor. However, I would be hesitant to use Pixel unless Google or Samsung sort out issues related to performance & network.

The post What Google needs to fix before I consider a Pixel? appeared first on Techans.

Here are a few of the ways the Apple Watch Ultra beats the regular Apple Watch:

• Battery life: The Apple Watch Ultra has the longest battery life of any Apple Watch. While my older Apple Watch 8 ended at around 50-60% at the end of a 12 hour workday, my Apple Watch Ultra 2 finishes the same period at around 80% battery. Astounding. This means you can wear it all day, even when you’re on the go, without having to worry about running out of battery.
• Display: The Apple Watch Ultra has the largest and brightest display of any Apple Watch. It’s a 49mm LTPO OLED display with a maximum brightness of 2,000 nits. This makes it easy to see the screen, even in bright sunlight. Most importantly, unlike the regular Watch which has a curved display, the Apple Watch Ultra series has a flat display which was a huge win for me!
• Durability: The Apple Watch Ultra is built to withstand the most extreme conditions. It has a titanium case, a sapphire crystal display, and a water resistance rating of up to 50 meters.

Apart from the above, the Apple Watch Ultra has a number of features that are not available on the regular Apple Watch, including a built-in siren, a new Wayfinder watch face with compass and backtrack functionality, and a new Action button that can be customised to launch your favourite apps. However, an average user may not want to pay extra for these features. But, the battery life, display & durability more than enhances the overall user experience.

The post Apple Watch Ultra Series: How Big an Upgrade Over Regular? appeared first on Techans.

Limited ECG and blood pressure monitoring in India

One of the main limitations of the Samsung Galaxy Smartwatch in India is that the ECG and blood pressure monitoring features are not available. This is due to regulatory restrictions in India. The Samsung Health Monitor app, which is required for these features, is not approved for use in India.

As a result, users in India will not be able to use the ECG and blood pressure monitoring features of the Samsung Galaxy Smartwatch. This is a major limitation, as these features can be very useful for tracking heart health.

Samsung Pay only available on newer models

Earlier, Samsung Pay was disabled for all Galaxy Watches in India. However, recently Samsung has opened on Samsung Pay for Watch 4 & later models in India. Older Galaxy Watches still do not support this feature.

Conclusion

Samsung is not offering any discounts on its Watch series in India for not providing ECG & blood pressure related health features. While it may be a good idea to buy older Watch 4 during the sales season since they sell for a huge discount, it may not be worthwhile to buy the latest Watch 5 or Watch 6 at the full prices Samsung demands.

The post Samsung Watch in India: Less features, Same Price appeared first on Techans.

1. Quality & Polish of UI & Apps
The UI on iPhone is top notch and with complete attention to detail. Android phones lack heavily in this aspect. Apps on iOS have better optimization and a more consistent experience. This results in smoother performance and a more refined design.

2. Seamless Ecosystem
One of the primary reasons for my switch to iPhone was the seamless integration within the Apple ecosystem. Along with my MacBook, iPad, Apple Watch & Airpods, I like how Apple’s products work harmoniously together.

3. Privacy and Security
Apple has a strong reputation for prioritizing user privacy and security. The closed nature of the iOS operating system and Apple’s stringent App Store policies help protect users from malware and data breaches.

4. Software Updates
iPhone users receive timely software updates across the globe at the same time. No country wise rollouts or no phase wise rollouts. Apple has also formalised the developer beta & public beta so well that early adopters can easily opt for it across the globe.

5. Quality of Hardware
Apple’s attention to detail and premium build quality are well-known. iPhones have a sleek, modern design and are made with high-quality materials. The camera capabilities, display, and overall performance of the iPhone made the switch even more compelling.

6. Customer Support
Apple’s customer support is renowned for its quality. The Apple Store offers in-person assistance, and the company’s online and phone support services are highly responsive. Especially with Apple Store coming up in BKC, Mumbai, this is an added advantage.

While both Android and iPhone have their strengths and weaknesses, the unique advantages of the iPhone ultimately swayed me towards this switch. My iPhone has become an integral part of my digital life, and I haven’t looked back since.

The post Why I ultimately made the Switch from Android to iPhone appeared first on Techans.