The content consumption&#x2F;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.<p>Let&#x27;s see what&#x27;s been using my phone&#x27;s battery lately. In decreasing order of usage:<p>• Nike Running<p>• Strava (cycling app)<p>• Safari (mostly Hacker News)<p>• Mail<p>• Messages<p>• Notes<p>• Health<p>I also use imiwa (Japanese dictionary), Anki (spaced repetition), Maps, Dark Sky (an <i>amazing</i> 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&#x27;t do them as well. For example, if someone texts, &quot;Where are you?&quot; I can reply with my GPS location and a map. That feature alone has saved me tons of time and frustration.<p>Even if all the issues raised by the author are valid (I don&#x27;t think they are), there&#x27;s still the fact that without my phone, I wouldn&#x27;t be quite as knowledgeable, as cultured, or as healthy. Those are the criteria we should use when evaluating these devices, not idealogical ones.