Google’s new desktop mode makes one thing clear: Samsung DeX was onto something


I’ve been waiting for Android to take desktop mode seriously for years. Back in 2019, I bought a OnePlus 7 Pro and wasted an embarrassing amount of time trying to brute-force its half-baked desktop mode into something useful.

The idea made perfect sense to me even then. Phones were already absurdly powerful, and the thought of carrying one real computer in my pocket felt less like science fiction and more like delayed common sense.

What wore me down wasn’t the idea. It was the waiting. Devices like the Steam Deck eventually showed that docking a compact machine into a usable desktop setup could actually work, while Google seemed to lose interest in pushing Android the same way.

Samsung, meanwhile, kept refining DeX in plain sight. I’ve spent years lurking on r/SamsungDex, watching people post desktop builds powered by a phone, and resenting the fact that the version I wanted most seemed locked behind an ecosystem I never really wanted to join.

So when Android 16 finally brought a connected-display desktop session to supported Pixel phones, it felt like an admission. Desktop mode had spent too long living as a weird experiment, half promise and half hobby.

Now it’s finally being treated like a real part of Android.

Stock Android grows up

Android 16’s desktop mode is now built into supported Pixel phones, which on paper makes this a big moment for stock Android.

Plug a Pixel 8 or newer into an external display and it can throw up a desktop-style workspace with a taskbar, resizable windows, app snapping, and keyboard shortcuts instead of just mirroring the phone screen.

It’s the clearest sign yet that Google wants Android to do more than act like a mobile operating system when the hardware clearly has bigger ambitions.

That should feel like a win. Mostly, it does. But it also comes with an awkward truth. Samsung has been doing this for years, and with a lot more certainty.

Samsung DeX isn’t just Android stretched across a monitor. It feels like a separate desktop layer, with deeper optimization and more conveniences that actually matter once the novelty wears off.

Samsung also supports things Google still doesn’t, including using the phone itself as a touchpad.

There’s the rub. The idea is finally official, but Samsung still looks like the company that understood the assignment first.

The difference between shipping and sanding

That becomes obvious once the novelty wears off. Google’s desktop session has the right visual cues, but it still feels tethered to the phone in ways DeX solved long ago.

It behaves like Android trying on desktop clothes, not a desktop environment that has fully settled into them.

DeX is harder to dismiss because Samsung kept building around the less glamorous realities of using a phone as a computer. It feels more self-contained.

Google’s version still carries first-generation friction. The phone display dependence, lighter customization, and sense that the desktop borrows too much from the phone make it feel less like a mature workspace and more like an early build that happened to ship.

Case in point, I wrote this piece on a Pixel 8a hooked up to a hub, monitor, mouse, and keyboard, while also pushing audio to a Bluetooth speaker.

Android 16 desktop mode can absolutely get real work done. That’s not really in question. The issue is that using it makes it painfully obvious where Google is still catching up.

Where the seams start to show

Android 16 desktop mode starts showing its seams the moment you try to make the setup feel like your own. There’s no desktop-only settings layer, so even basic tweaks spill back into the phone.

Change the DPI to make text more readable on a monitor, and it changes on the handset too. You can’t change the wallpaper on desktop without changing the wallpaper on the phone either, which sounds minor until the whole desktop starts feeling less like a workspace and more like a projection.

Some of the rougher edges are harder to ignore too. Games run fine, which at least proves the concept isn’t starved for horsepower, but other parts still feel unfinished.

For example, the camera preview aspect ratio is off, and little issues like that keep breaking the illusion.

DeX, by contrast, has enough bells and whistles to earn its place as a daily driver. Its extra features don’t feel ornamental. They exist to sand down the friction that comes with turning a phone into a desktop. With DeX, the phone feels like the hardware running the desktop.

With Google’s version, the phone still feels like the main event. The desktop is there, but it never fully stops feeling tied to the handset.

Even so, both still have a whiff of novelty about them. That’s the part this category still hasn’t solved.

Living in the future is supposed to feel seamless, not like a chain of small concessions stitched together by a USB-C hub. The technology is here. The effortlessness isn’t.

Why this matters beyond Pixel

What makes Google’s move matter isn’t that it beats DeX. It doesn’t.

This signals that desktop mode is no longer some OEM curiosity. Once Google bakes it into stock Android on Pixel, the whole category gets harder to dismiss.

That changes the equation for app developers, accessory makers, and Android brands that mostly treated phone-powered desktop computing like a niche trick.

Samsung proved the idea could work. Google can make it harder for the rest of Android to keep shrugging it off.

There’s still some irony here. Google is validating a vision Samsung spent years testing in public, only to arrive with a version that feels less complete.

DeX still looks like the more polished system because Samsung spent more time sanding down the boring edges that make desktop mode live or die.

Still, I can’t be too cynical about Android 16 desktop mode finally showing up. After years of demos, workarounds, and wishful thinking, even that counts. Sometimes progress isn’t polished. Sometimes it’s just a platform finally admitting the nerds were right.



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