The Dark Side of Budget Android: Nagware, Ads, and Dark Patterns.
Recently, I purchased an Android phone for a friend, priced at ₹16,000 (approximately $190 USD), and assisted in setting it up. The process proved unexpectedly challenging, requiring us to navigate through a maze of “OK,” “Continue,” and “Skip” buttons just to make the device usable. This experience was further marred by the presence of nagware and advertisements, creating a sense of traversing a digital minefield.
Even after completing the initial setup, we discovered over a dozen pre-installed apps that we hadn’t chosen. Advertisements were omnipresent, appearing on the lock screen and following nearly every interaction with the operating system settings. Moreover, each time I installed an application from the Google Play Store, an Avast scan would automatically run, followed by yet another advertisement, before I could access the newly installed app.
From a hardware perspective, the phone is quite capable, boasting a decent camera, good audio quality, and a fine display. However, the software experience falls short of expectations.
This issue isn’t unique to the “Realme 12x 5G” device I had in hand; I’ve encountered similar problems with other Android OEMs like Redmi and Oppo. Google had a programme called Android One, which ensured a clean Android experience, with OEMs like Nokia participating. I’m uncertain about its current status. While I understand that profit margins on non-premium models are slim, surely there must be a better way to generate revenue without subjecting users to such a frustrating experience.
It appears that Google has lost its ability to effectively steward Android, with its focus now shifted towards AI. This change in priorities raises questions about their commitment to Android users. Given their dominant position in search, the revenue from low-end Android devices is likely insignificant for them, explaining their apparent indifference to these intrusive practices. While exerting control over an open-source OS like Android is challenging, Google can still influence OEMs who deploy the Google Play Store, especially considering the significant revenue they derive from in-app purchases. The absence of the Google Play Store on a device could serve as a warning for users to avoid that particular model.
A few years ago, I would have hoped that the innovative minds and the “Do no Evil” ethos at Google would find a way to prioritise user experience. However, those hopes are fading. Unfortunately, we may need to turn to elected representatives, who are likely to act slowly, for assistance. Perhaps it’s time for governments to step in and regulate this aspect of the market, as free-market dynamics have failed to protect consumers, especially the elderly and the tech-illiterate. It feels as though OEMs and Google are doing a disservice to this demographic, inadvertently training them to accept intrusive ads, which scammers can exploit. Unsolicited and intrusive advertisements that employ dark patterns, such as the absence of close buttons, are a serious issue and should be treated as such.
Originally published at https://venkatarangan.com on August 17, 2024.
