Brick vs. Bloom Card: I tested both for my screen addiction, and the winner depends on you


img-4118.jpg

pros and cons

Pros

  • Better app than Brick.
  • Easy app scheduling.
  • Lower price.
Cons

  • Continued to block apps after my scheduled time was over.
  • Breaks defeat the purpose of strictly curbing screen time.

I’m on track to having spent 16 years of my life glued to my phone screen. That’s what Bloom, the latest salve to phone addiction, tells me as I create my account. 

16 years. According to my calculations, if I weren’t attached to my phone’s addictive mechanisms, I could have spent that time running 1,700 marathons, grabbing 2,900 cups worth of coffee with friends, or adding one or two more hours of sleep to my night each night. Instead, I scroll. 

And I’m not alone. 

Also: The base model Kindle is my secret weapon against doomscrolling – and it’s on sale

As phone addiction becomes more widespread — and as we learn how social media keeps us addicted — more companies are coming up with solutions. Bloom is one of those companies that, like the popular Brick, developed a tap-able NFC-enabled card that creates a physical boundary between the user and their dopamine-triggering device. 

Best mobile deals of the week

Deals are selected by the CNET Group commerce team, and may be unrelated to this article.

I’ve been using the Brick since October and have found it to be a straightforward way to remove distractions as I work, leisure, and sleep. But it’s not perfect. There are a few bugs, and the app is quite minimalist. 

A friend of mine and fellow Brick user told me about the Bloom Card and gave me one of his own. He said it addresses some of the Brick’s flaws, so I tested it out for a few weeks. 

Bloom vs. Brick

First things first: the Bloom Card is $39, whereas the Brick is $54. The better option depends on just how addicted you are to your phone, as I realized after weeks of testing. 

In essence, the Bloom Card does the same thing as the Brick. You tap your phone to it, and it blocks distracting apps. The differences surface more through each respective app’s software, as the hardware of an NFC-enabled card or block is practically the same. Bloom’s app has a better user experience, though, with a Friends tab, for example that incorporate social accountability.

Also: I bricked my iPhone to prevent doomscrolling – and accidentally fixed my life

You start by selecting the apps you want to block and creating disabling schedules, a process I think Bloom does better. Bloom has a dedicated tab for creating regimented schedules with default schedules are already created, so a lot of the work you’d have to do to put in these schedules on Brick is already handled for you. 

For example, there’s a Morning Zen schedule you can turn on from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. that I quite like, a Deep Work schedule from 10 a.m. to noon, and a Wind Down from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., among others. 

Within each schedule, you can enable or disable certain apps. If I turn on Deep Work, I can enable social media apps during the workday (as I use them for my job) but disable messaging apps, which tend to distract me. For Wind Down, I disable social media and messaging apps. 

Also: How I turned my regular tablet into a full-fledged e-reader (whether it’s an iPad or Android)

Ironically, for a device that’s meant to help you disengage with your phone, the app was very engaging. As I mentioned, there’s a Friends tab where I can track my focus time against my friends. You can also see a Global leaderboard, where users are charting their focus for up to 458 days through Bloom. Lastly, there’s the Insights feature, which displays your screen time, daily pickups, and focus time through Bloom. 

Why I (temporarily) deleted the app

Bloom Card

Nina Raemont/ZDNET

Tapping my phone to the NFC card is easy and worked regularly without issues. However, an in-app error forced me to delete the app for a few days. I had the Morning Zen schedule enabled one morning, and it continued to block access to my apps, even after the 9 a.m. cutoff. 

I did not have the Bloom Card with me to tap and enable access, so I was locked out for several hours, forcing me to delete the Bloom app to use these apps. This has happened with the Brick as well, and it seems to be a bug across these devices. When I reviewed Brick, I mentioned the similar scheduling bug. 

Also: I found 4 tech gadgets that actually helped me sleep better (and ditch the alarm)

There is one thing Bloom has that Brick doesn’t: breaks. Bloom allows you three five-minute breaks each session, a feature that was great at first, but I ended up abusing the feature every time I was in a Bloom session. It made the whole point of preventing doomscrolling counterproductive. 

This could maybe help with someone who doesn’t have as bad of a phone addiction (or more self control), but considering that the target audience of products like Brick and Bloom are phone-addicted people, it seems like it could further enable bad habits. 

The Brick is far stricter, and I hope the Brick never offers up breaks because of the counter-productivity of this Bloom feature. 

ZDNET’s buying advice

So, at $39, is the Bloom worth it? If you think you won’t abuse that five-minute break feature, I’d recommend Bloom over Brick. If you are in dire need of cutting screen time, I’d go for Brick instead for its slightly stricter take and less engaging app.

Bloom does a lot of the work of building schedules for you to easily enable, but it’s a bit more lenient in ways I find counter productive for curbing a serious case of phone addiction. However, it’s the cheaper option compared to Brick, so I’d still recommend it to anyone on a budget. 





Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


As I’m writing this, NVIDIA is the largest company in the world, with a market cap exceeding $4 trillion. Team Green is now the leader among the Magnificent Seven of the tech world, having surpassed them all in just a few short years.

The company has managed to reach these incredible heights with smart planning and by making the right moves for decades, the latest being the decision to sell shovels during the AI gold rush. Considering the current hardware landscape, there’s simply no reason for NVIDIA to rush a new gaming GPU generation for at least a few years. Here’s why.

Scarcity has become the new normal

Not even Nvidia is powerful enough to overcome market constraints

Global memory shortages have been a reality since late 2025, and they aren’t just affecting RAM and storage manufacturers. Rather, this impacts every company making any product that contains memory or storage—including graphics cards.

Since NVIDIA sells GPU and memory bundles to its partners, which they then solder onto PCBs and add cooling to create full-blown graphics cards, this means that NVIDIA doesn’t just have to battle other tech giants to secure a chunk of TSMC’s limited production capacity to produce its GPU chips. It also has to procure massive amounts of GPU memory, which has never been harder or more expensive to obtain.

While a company as large as NVIDIA certainly has long-term contracts that guarantee stable memory prices, those contracts aren’t going to last forever. The company has likely had to sign new ones, considering the GPU price surge that began at the beginning of 2026, with gaming graphics cards still being overpriced.

With GPU memory costing more than ever, NVIDIA has little reason to rush a new gaming GPU generation, because its gaming earnings are just a drop in the bucket compared to its total earnings.

NVIDIA is an AI company now

Gaming GPUs are taking a back seat

A graph showing NVIDIA revenue breakdown in the last few years. Credit: appeconomyinsights.com

NVIDIA’s gaming division had been its golden goose for decades, but come 2022, the company’s data center and AI division’s revenue started to balloon dramatically. By the beginning of fiscal year 2023, data center and AI revenue had surpassed that of the gaming division.

In fiscal year 2026 (which began on July 1, 2025, and ends on June 30, 2026), NVIDIA’s gaming revenue has contributed less than 8% of the company’s total earnings so far. On the other hand, the data center division has made almost 90% of NVIDIA’s total revenue in fiscal year 2026. What I’m trying to say is that NVIDIA is no longer a gaming company—it’s all about AI now.

Considering that we’re in the middle of the biggest memory shortage in history, and that its AI GPUs rake in almost ten times the revenue of gaming GPUs, there’s little reason for NVIDIA to funnel exorbitantly priced memory toward gaming GPUs. It’s much more profitable to put every memory chip they can get their hands on into AI GPU racks and continue receiving mountains of cash by selling them to AI behemoths.

The RTX 50 Super GPUs might never get released

A sign of times to come

NVIDIA’s RTX 50 Super series was supposed to increase memory capacity of its most popular gaming GPUs. The 16GB RTX 5080 was to be superseded by a 24GB RTX 5080 Super; the same fate would await the 16GB RTX 5070 Ti, while the 18GB RTX 5070 Super was to replace its 12GB non-Super sibling. But according to recent reports, NVIDIA has put it on ice.

The RTX 50 Super launch had been slated for this year’s CES in January, but after missing the show, it now looks like NVIDIA has delayed the lineup indefinitely. According to a recent report, NVIDIA doesn’t plan to launch a single new gaming GPU in 2026. Worse still, the RTX 60 series, which had been expected to debut sometime in 2027, has also been delayed.

A report by The Information (via Tom’s Hardware) states that NVIDIA had finalized the design and specs of its RTX 50 Super refresh, but the RAM-pocalypse threw a wrench into the works, forcing the company to “deprioritize RTX 50 Super production.” In other words, it’s exactly what I said a few paragraphs ago: selling enterprise GPU racks to AI companies is far more lucrative than selling comparatively cheaper GPUs to gamers, especially now that memory prices have been skyrocketing.

Before putting the RTX 50 series on ice, NVIDIA had already slashed its gaming GPU supply by about a fifth and started prioritizing models with less VRAM, like the 8GB versions of the RTX 5060 and RTX 5060 Ti, so this news isn’t that surprising.

So when can we expect RTX 60 GPUs?

Late 2028-ish?

A GPU with a pile of money around it. Credit: Lucas Gouveia / How-To Geek

The good news is that the RTX 60 series is definitely in the pipeline, and we will see it sooner or later. The bad news is that its release date is up in the air, and it’s best not to even think about pricing. The word on the street around CES 2026 was that NVIDIA would release the RTX 60 series in mid-2027, give or take a few months. But as of this writing, it’s increasingly likely we won’t see RTX 60 GPUs until 2028.

If you’ve been following the discussion around memory shortages, this won’t be surprising. In late 2025, the prognosis was that we wouldn’t see the end of the RAM-pocalypse until 2027, maybe 2028. But a recent statement by SK Hynix chairman (the company is one of the world’s three largest memory manufacturers) warns that the global memory shortage may last well into 2030.

If that turns out to be true, and if the global AI data center boom doesn’t slow down in the next few years, I wouldn’t be surprised if NVIDIA delays the RTX 60 GPUs as long as possible. There’s a good chance we won’t see them until the second half of 2028, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they miss that window as well if memory supply doesn’t recover by then. Data center GPUs are simply too profitable for NVIDIA to reserve a meaningful portion of memory for gaming graphics cards as long as shortages persist.


At least current-gen gaming GPUs are still a great option for any PC gamer

If there is a silver lining here, it is that current-gen gaming GPUs (NVIDIA RTX 50 and AMD Radeon RX 90) are still more than powerful enough for any current AAA title. Considering that Sony is reportedly delaying the PlayStation 6 and that global PC shipments are projected to see a sharp, double-digit decline in 2026, game developers have little incentive to push requirements beyond what current hardware can handle.

DLSS 5, on the other hand, may be the future of gaming, but no one likes it, and it will take a few years (and likely the arrival of the RTX 60 lineup) for it to mature and become usable on anything that’s not a heckin’ RTX 5090.

If you’re open to buying used GPUs, even last-gen gaming graphics cards offer tons of performance and are able to rein in any AAA game you throw at them. While we likely won’t get a new gaming GPU from NVIDIA for at least a few years, at least the ones we’ve got are great today and will continue to chew through any game for the foreseeable future.



Source link