Motorola Razr 40 Ultra cover screen design is bad and overrated

As you may have heard, Motorola has released a new foldable flip phone. It goes by the name of Razr 40 Ultra in some markets, Razr+ in others, and it's even referred to as the Razr 2023 or Razr 4 in certain areas. Regardless of its name, it looks like a decent flip phone with a more generous cover display than the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 4. And sure enough, that cover display has gotten a lot of attention in the media.

In my book, however, the Razr 40 Ultra cover display is highly overrated. Don't get me wrong. As a whole, the Moto Razr 40 Ultra might be one of the better foldable flip phones not made by Samsung — even though it still appears to lack a serious IP certificate. But the hype the Razr 40 Ultra gets over its cover screen design is, in my opinion, unwarranted. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that the Razr 40 Ultra cover screen highlights one of the biggest issues concerning the Android phone industry or the so-called Android influencer sphere: phone designs that are built for clicks rather than a better user experience, and influencers that go along with it.

Despite appearances, the large camera cutouts aren't any better than a huge notch

Here's the deal. Nobody's comparing the Razr 40 Ultra with the existing Z Flip 4. And if I were to do that, I'd go ahead and say that the cover screen on the Razr 40 Ultra is more exciting than the Z Flip 4's. But the majority of tech enthusiasts compare the Razr 40 Ultra to the upcoming Galaxy Z Flip 5, and rightfully so, given that Samsung's next-gen flip phone is just around the corner. Both phones try to achieve a larger, more usable cover screen, but they go about it in different ways.

While the Razr 40 Ultra cover screen has three thin bezels and a thicker one near the hinge, along with two huge display cutouts for the cameras and a smaller one for the LED flash, Samsung is taking another design route.

Similar to the Razr 40 Ultra, the Galaxy Z Flip 5 will have three thin bezels and a thicker one, except it prioritizes the bezel near the hinge by making it thinner. This should help one-hand usability, as the hinge is always at the top when using the phone folded shut. The thicker lower bezel moves the screen closer to the hinge, which should let you reach UI elements with your thumb easier. At least in theory.

But more to the point at hand — which is the cover screen design itself — the Z Flip 5 encapsulates its camera system in a notch that gives the display a folder-like shape. It doesn't have oversized cutouts in the display for its cameras. And although the folder-like notch looks unusual, it might work for the better, as far as the bond between hardware and software (and the user experience) is concerned.

Most people will say we won't know with certainty which method is better until the Galaxy Z Flip 5 hits the market. Others say the Razr 40 Ultra's cover screen is plain better. But personally, I can already wholeheartedly thank Samsung for not following in Motorola's footsteps and borrowing its cover screen design ideas. And here's why.

Designed for internet hype rather than a superior user experience

I believe that the Razr 40 Ultra cover screen design gives the illusion that it doesn't have a notch when, in fact, it does. Motorola's solution doesn't make the chopped-up display area any more usable than a traditional notch would. In fact, I'm arguing that it is worse and might get more in the way.

You see, while Samsung's Infinity-O selfie camera cutouts you find on most phones are small enough to ignore (and don't protrude), Motorola's huge camera cutouts are too big to retain any usability. On top of that, they eat big chunks of the UI for the vast majority of apps running in “full-screen” mode.

As exemplified through the screenshot below (courtesy of Pocket-lint), two whole buttons in Google Maps, namely “Contribute” and “Updates,” are hidden behind the Razr 40 Ultra's cameras. Funnily enough, the letter “e” in “Contribute” does show up between the two modules.

This tells me that, design-wise, not much here was well-planned or thought out by Motorola. Very little energy was spent on integrating the camera cutouts with the user experience at the software level in a creative way. And in my opinion, no amount of cute cat animations for the cover screen will change that.

Motorola's software implementation seems to disregard the design of the hardware. There's no strong bond between the cover display itself and the software running on it. They're two separate things joined together hastily. It's as if Motola just flipped the switch ON to allow full Android apps to run on the display, only as a way to grab the headlines.

Samsung, due to what seems to be a more creative approach, can't afford to ignore its notched display design. And as we exclusively reported, Samsung did work closely with Google to optimize apps for the cover screen. But Motorola, because of its design approach, can pretend like the camera cutouts aren't in the way and avoid spending more energy on creating a better user experience through hardware and software synergy.

Nevertheless, a pretend larger cover screen can only get you so far. Even Motorola seems to be aware that the camera cutouts make the cover screen less usable due to it eating big chunks of the UI. It provided a so-called solution, in that users can long-press the home button on the cover screen to minimize the active display area and turn the cover screen into a smaller, more rectangular panel.

How is this any better than the Z Flip 5's cover screen? I don't think it is. And if users have to minimize the active area of the cover screen to make it less annoying, is the Razr 40 Ultra's cover screen actually larger than the Z Flip 5's in practical terms? Food for thought.

Personally, I believe that even though this might look like a clever solution, it also looks an awful lot like a solution to a problem that shouldn't have existed in the first place. One that seemingly exists because Motorola wanted the media to say that its foldable flip phone has a bigger cover screen than Samsung's. Even if this comes at the expense of the user experience.

As far as I can tell, this camera cutout design for the Razr 40 Ultra cover screen wasn't made for better usability or a stronger bond between software and the hardware. It was made for marketing purposes and to give social media influencers some ammo to generate hype. So far, the strategy seems to have worked well for Motorola. Nevertheless, I do hope prospective buyers won't fall for it easily but take more time to look beyond appearances.

At the end of the day, the Razr 40 Ultra may be a decent flip phone as a whole, but its cover screen design is grossly overhyped, and its design approach highlights an obsession some OEMs have with making things look good on paper and in marketing material, even though it doesn't help the user experience any.

I certainly have faith that the Galaxy Z Flip 5's oddly-shaped cover screen will marry the hardware and software more successfully for a tighter and more cohesive user experience. To me, that's the definition of “good design.” Some may think surface beauty means everything, but I believe a good design must not hinder the user experience but make it better through a combination of both form and function. Selling a problem for a solution that shouldn't exist in the first place is not the path to greatness. And unfortunately for Motorola fans, this is precisely what the Razr 40 Ultra's cover screen design seems to be doing.