The content consumption/creation distinction is a useful one, and I agree that phones are definitely more geared toward consumption. Still, I think the author d

The content consumption/creation distinction is a useful one, and I agree that phones are definitely more geared toward consumption. Still, I think the author drastically underestimates the benefits of smartphones, especially when it comes to the non-technical crowd. Let's see what's been using my phone's battery lately. In decreasing order of usage: • Nike Running • Strava (cycling app) • Safari (mostly Hacker News) • Mail • Messages • Notes • Health I also use imiwa (Japanese dictionary), Anki (spaced repetition), Maps, Dark Sky (an amazing weather app), and Kindle. Thanks to my phone, I take more photos. I read more books. I can summon an Uber. Yes, some of these uses are purely content consumption, but many are incredibly useful. While a dumb phone and some dedicated devices could do many of these things, they couldn't do them as well. For example, if someone texts, "Where are you?" I can reply with my GPS location and a map. That feature alone has saved me tons of time and frustration. Even if all the issues raised by the author are valid (I don't think they are), there's still the fact that without my phone, I wouldn't be quite as knowledgeable, as cultured, or as healthy. Those are the criteria we should use when evaluating these devices, not idealogical ones.