
I Don't Like Smartphones (2016) - stargrave
https://www.devever.net/~hl/smartphones
======
vikingcaffiene
The author went somewhere totally different than I thought they would here.
Their argument boils down to “smartphones are shitty computers with too many
limitations”. This is a fair point but arguably not the main one.

IMO the real reason smartphones suck is that they are attention sucking,
dopamine delivery systems. A logical evolution of a slot machine. I hate mine
yet here I am yelling into the internet on it...

~~~
cortic
>attention sucking, dopamine delivery systems

I've been siting here for five minutes, trying to think about something,
anything, that is _good_ and doesn't fit that description. Everything people
like, from exercise to socializing, shopping to charity. Literally everything
that i _do_ and that i _like_ can be summed up as some form of _attention
sucking, dopamine delivery system_.

~~~
headsoup
Just be careful to draw the distinction between a dopamine hit as a reward for
genuine effort and one delivered deliberately to reinforce an action...

~~~
buboard
Actually all reward systems work the same. There is no distinction between
reward that is deemed good and bad for society.

~~~
taneq
I don't think parent is saying the mechanism is different, just that we need
to distinguish the effects.

------
pwenzel
I've gone through this thought exercise a lot myself, even considering
replacing my iPhone with a flip phone. For me personally, the issue is the
time-sucking nature of the apps and services that were on my phone.

To solve this, I deleted any apps with infinitely scrolling content, leaving
my phone to include only utilitarian functionality, maps, and tools for music
creation.

Because I know myself and my vices, I went so far as to add Facebook,
Instagram, and Reddit to the "Restricted Content" list.

I bookmarked text.npr.org and mprnews.org and use those as my quick, bullshit-
free gateway to local and national news.

With my phone in utility mode, I no longer experience false vibrations or that
feeling of a phone burning a hole in my pocket.

Finally, I joined a meditation center and attend weekly.

My relationship with my phone is improved. It's great.

Always looking for more suggestions.

~~~
frosted-flakes
What about websites like Hacker News?

~~~
pwenzel
I set my Hacker News profile to `noprocrast=yes`.

------
everyone
I would also add that from a UX perspective they utterly suck. Many task that
are possible with a mouse / keyboard setup are impossible on a smartphone, and
what _is_ possible is much much slower and less precise.

I think its clear they have been designed from the ground up to be merely
shiny toys / gadgets, and not useful pocket computers.

The key fundamental flaw in their design is the touchscreen. Eg. Press a
'button' which is just an image on the screen and has 0 haptic feedback, so
the only way to locate it is by looking at it, but your finger is obscuring it
(as you are moving to press it with your finger) so you cant see it. It is
oxymoronical design.

~~~
Wowfunhappy
> Many task that are possible with a mouse / keyboard setup are impossible on
> a smartphone, and what is possible is much much slower and less precise.

I agree. But, you can't practically put a mouse on a phone. (At least, I have
no idea how it could work—if you have a brilliant idea, I'd be interested to
hear it.)

I think touch is the best input we have available for a device the size of a
phone. On tablets, the lack of a mouse makes less sense, and I think it's
notable that tablets haven't replaced laptops to the extent some predicted
when the iPad was first introduced.

Edit: There is one alternative mechanism I can think of—a _stylus_. Still
touch, but offers much more precision and in turn allows interfaces to be
designed with smaller buttons that take up less real-estate.

The downside is that styluses get lost, take time to extract from the slot,
and cannot be used in the same hand that holds the phone. Also, to truly reap
the benefits of stylus input, the UI would need to be wholly stylus-focused. A
hybrid UI will need to work with the lowest common denominator.

~~~
everyone
Just something like a Blackberry is decent.. Where you have a screen, that you
look at, and buttons that you press with your fingers. Not a screen that you
cover with your fingers and also a haptically featureless screen that you
press with your fingers.

Handheld gaming devices are actually often well designed, eg. Gameboy, PSP.

Gaming consoles have a long heritage of being able to navigate complex menus
and perform complex tasks on with just a controller (eg. Mario-maker,
LittleBigPlanet)

Phones / tablets _are fine_ for just faffing about on, but that is all they
have been designed for imo.

I think a pocket computer designed for actually doing stuff on might resemble
a weird Blackberry / PSP hybrid.

~~~
Wowfunhappy
Mario Maker uses a touch screen.

Little Big Planet worked impressively well with buttons, but I wouldn't
consider it ideal, and it's notable that the spiritual successor, Dreams, is
designed around a mouse-like, gyroscope-controlled pointer. Media Molecule
chose this option despite the fact that it feels awkward on a dualshock and
requires frequent re-centering.

I do miss slide out keyboards, but I don't think they're a complete solution.
Similar to a stylus, sliding out a keyboard takes precious seconds, and they
introduce a mechanical failure point. If you go full-on Blackberry, you loose
valuable screen real-estate.

~~~
everyone
* Mario Maker uses a touch screen.

Ok, well 'street fighter', you need to input very complex and precise
controls. Or pokemon on the gameboy, or a JRPG with its labyrinthine menus and
options + 100's of complex difficult games.

* sliding out a keyboard takes precious seconds

As opposed to the minutes you lose fumbling with a 'keyboard' you cant feel
(or see, cus ure finger is in front of it)

* If you go full-on Blackberry, you loose valuable screen real-estate.

If that 'real estate' is also trying to act as a physical interface, then its
not valuable real estate anymore, its garbage-land, its acting as the worst
interface imaginable. Ive heard that expression before and I think what the
phone designers mean when they say it is: if you add a keyboard it no longer
looks like a _cool_ shiny sci-fi gadget.

I dont get how people are ok with touchsceen interfaces, they're a haptic
_nothing_. People were livid about the IBM PCjr's chiclet keyboard. Even that
is infinitely better than 0.

------
nextos
I don't like smartphones either, mostly for a reason he missed. They are
_intrusive_. They are designed to suck your attention, and I feel peer
pressure to be available all the time. I refuse to, and I'm often looked down
for this reason.

I prefer extreme computing devices. Either big desktops, with great ergonomics
and power, or tiny _non-intrusive_ wearables.

I hope we get true autonomous watches soon, that can silently track some
biomarkers and offer some smartphone-like capabilities for occasional use
(maps, calls & IM) without apps nagging for your attention.

------
apo
Smartphones rob users of the ability to communicate person-to-person.

Visit any restaurant and you'll find example after example of people
worshiping at their private electronic altars despite the presence of friends
and family.

Or try having a conversation with almost anyone with a smartphone. The minute
a notification goes off, they're gone. Master calls, bye.

It's a vicious cycle. Greater isolation leads to greater dependence on the
fake bullshit being spewed.

It's kind of comical to see geezers doing this. But to see it in young adults
is terrifying. They're going to fight this addiction until the day they die.
Most won't even know what's wrong with their lives because they've never seen
anything else.

~~~
Ishmaeli
Most won't even know what's wrong with their lives because they've never seen
anything else.

I feel like that's something every older generation says about the younger
generations. Why should the younger generations care about ways of living that
are no longer relevant to them? If nobody knows that they're doing it wrong,
then are they really doing it wrong?

~~~
neuralRiot
Technology changes but the human nature at the core does not, we are a social
animal and we need to live in packs where communication, verbal and nonverbal
are key, it's not just cultural but primal, i see it everyday, people don't
know how to socialize or communicate anymore and that leads to isolation and
depression.

------
buboard
> They have ruined web design.

With regards to that: maybe we should switch away from responsive designs?
Modern phones have big enough screens that it s often better to navigate a
medium-desktop site by zooming rather than by collapsing everything to an
endless scrolling stream. I find often that trying to compromise things to fit
in responsive design is annoying for little benefit.

> They have led to massive centralization

I really wish someone comes up with a successful home router that includes
preloaded optional decentralized services like ipfs. It's a pity that we don't
take advantage of can't take advantage of that always-on computing power in
the era of crappy-battery tablets and phones.

~~~
looeee
> Modern phones have big enough screens

Not all phones have big screens. Not all people want phones with big screens,
and even though it's the current fashion that may change in a few years.

~~~
buboard
Agreed. But they have high enough resolution to show any website in a
reasonable, pinchable way

~~~
kps
But mobile browsers choose not to. Text too small? All you can do is zoom in
and then you're stuck scrolling back and forth line by line.

------
el_cujo
I like the idea of getting rid of my smart phone, and I don't really have the
"addiction" a lot of people seem to have, but every time I think about getting
rid of it, I'm stopped because:

1) Maps/GPS for driving

2) Ride Sharing apps

3) Web browser for quick googling when I'm out

I can live without access to phone games or the reddit app, but it would be
enough of a burden for me to not have access to these three things that I
don't see myself dropping a smart phone any time soon.

~~~
Bakary
One solution is to password protect the app store and forget the password or
give it to someone else.

------
LogicalBorg
What a terrible article.

They are unequal devices. - This is not a design flaw. The screen is just
small.

They are not real network clients. - This is not a design flaw. It's the best
batteries can do.

They have led to massive centralization. - No, high bandwidth and big data
requiring centralized processing is what led to centralization.

They have ruined web design. - This isn't even a critique of smartphones, it's
about desktops.

There are no secure smartphones. - Are they really worse than other computers?

They are devices of unclear alignment, or of clear malevolence. - Wait, what?
You claim that your phone is not secure, then you want to root it, install
arbitrary software, and do your online banking on it? wtf?

------
gitgud
> _They have ruined web design... Suffice to say however that I am very, very
> tired of the epidemic of (often massive) position: fixed headers on websites
> nowadays._

Well fixed headers are annoying, but I find that considering all sorts of
screen sizes has actually _improved_ web design in the most part.

Most sites are better in terms of accessibility and UX than they were 15 years
ago, which could be attributed to more diversity in devices that developers
need to deploy to.

~~~
Crinus
> considering all sorts of screen sizes has actually improved web design in
> the most part

Yeah, no. Considering all sorts of screen sizes usually means considering all
sorts of mobile screen sizes and depending on your browser width, which
oversized, overpadded elements will disappear.

And woe to you if you are using a low DPI desktop screen and do not want to
have your browser window maximized, because suddenly your 23" or 27" monitor
gets the shitty mobile UI.

------
grive
I consider the main issue to be the first point: that they are purely
consumption-oriented platforms. This might evolve for the better though with a
little imagination(°).

However I disagree with the second point. Smartphones were optimized for power
consumption, while PC were optimized for stability and functionality
(depending on your operational flavor, the platform can be quite flexible,
allowing such seemingly contradictory directions).

This "optimization for (reducing) power-consumption" is the only times it
seems to have happened, and it is actually a good contribution to network
design. We should actually embrace this process in general, not only mobility-
based computers.

°: A future where your smartphone will be your transportable workstation, only
docking on controls changing depending on your activity (screen + keyboard +
mouse in general, screen / speakers for media consumption, joysticks for
gaming). You'd arrive to work and dock your phone, start working, take it with
you and being able to work from another office, another location, remotely (at
home), etc.

~~~
asark
I've never understood the "they're only consumption devices" gripe. It's such
a narrow perspective, and very programmer-centric. I use mine,

1) as a tool to build real-world stuff (a level, camera to get reference
pictures, measurement notes for when I go to the hardware store, measurement
converter)

2) to regularly take better pictures of my kids than we get from "real"
photographers with fancy, expensive cameras & lenses—and I barely even know
WTF I'm doing, _plus_ I'm like 2 generations behind on my iPhone,

3) to cook—measurement conversion, recipe book which _I guess_ is consumption
but I also use it to track results and take notes for the next time I cook
something

4) I write messages to people. If that's consumption then so's letter writing
which... can't be right.

5) Note-taking device for various personal projects, most of them having
nothing to do with programming (thank God).

Further, if you asked me to film & edit a movie with a single device, you bet
your ass I'd take a "consumption-only" iPad or (even) iPhone over a laptop or
desktop. And so on for a bunch of other non-consumption stuff, for which the
devices are anywhere from good-enough to much-better when compared with a
laptop.

They're not great for programming, sure. Phones are awkward for long-form
writing, though tablets are fine with an external keyboard. They're pretty
good—even great—for tons of other creative work. Programming is not the only
thing computers are for. In fact we program only to make the computer let us
do _other_ stuff with it. From a certain perspective, programming's the
_worst_ creative thing you can use a computer for.

------
kilo_bravo_3
>Smartphones are unapologetically devices for consumption.

The only people who say this, as well as "Tablets are only for consumption"
are those who lack creativity and imagination.

Movies have been shot on smartphones. Music has been produced on smartphones.
Novels have been written on smartphones.

On a smartphone I have "created" or edited notes, videos, spreadsheets, photo
slideshows, goofy songs for friends and family, and smartphones are a portal
to a vast wealth of information that is infinitely more convenient and useful
for my technical hobbies than a laptop or desktop PC.

Ham radio tools, astronomy tools, film photography light metering apps, the
list goes on and on.

Using Star Walk to peruse the constellations at night while in your backyard
"creates" knowledge and memories better than any astronomy program on a
"computer".

If you're not using a smartphone (AND TABLET!) to "create", you are probably a
very boring person.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
> Novels have been written on smartphones.

There's no accounting for masochists I suppose. That's like saying its
possible to beat Dark Souls with a Guitar Hero controller. It may be
technically true but that doesn't mean anyone should ever do it.

~~~
judge2020
Nice reference - [https://youtu.be/g789wC9YhCw](https://youtu.be/g789wC9YhCw)

~~~
zimpenfish
Which lead me to "Using Donkey Kong Bongos, I beat Dark Souls 3 with no
shields or summon."

[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLI4MuUyu64FsljRm8G0jr...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLI4MuUyu64FsljRm8G0jrSqPo1RET8kJM)

 _shakes head in bewildered admiration_

------
thekingofh
Smartphones are great for communication. Better than anything we've had
before. But past a point, they are distracting. Just use smartphones for
communication and have the self control to avoid the pitfalls.

~~~
jmiskovic
For me it's not just communication. Maps give you super-powers. Camera comes
in handy. Phones are decent remote controllers for other devices. Playing
music (and occasional video) is also useful feature. All these features except
incoming communication require you to engage, which provides benefit without
stripping me of control.

Just disable most of (or all?) notifications and don't use social networks.
Observe yourself checking the phone compulsively, and disable distractions
that cause this behavior.

------
0x445442
I've had this idea of starting a SaaS of sorts which delivers a bunch of
functionality supplied by apps and web pages over SMS. Back in the early
2000's using my Blackberry 7290 I was able to access all kinds of information
by texting to various short codes.

Does anyone here think there's a demand for this type of service anymore. It
seems a lot of folks just want talk and text with access to some information
like news headlines, weather reports, sports scores etc. All doable over SMS.

------
diveanon
I would pay a significant amount of money for a general computing device with
the form factor and build quality of an iPhone.

Cell phones are amazing tech hamstrung by operating systems designed to drain
wallets and collect data.

I do not have a phone number and I use a lower end Samsung basically as an
ipod with wifi support. It constantly annoys me that apps that have no reason
to require a phone number will not even let you register without one.

~~~
xisukar
> I do not have a phone number and I use a lower end Samsung basically as an
> ipod with wifi support. It constantly annoys me that apps that have no
> reason to require a phone number will not even let you register without one.

This is interesting. I've never had a cellphone plan myself, however given
that some apps (e.g., Telegram) and job applications require a phone number as
you say, I've been using a TextNow [1] phone number with the caveat of needing
wifi/cellular data. As of now, the only thing that worries me a bit is when
I'm out and I need to contact someone but I don't have wifi access.

So how do you go about without a phone (mainly for calls)?

[1] [https://www.textnow.com/](https://www.textnow.com/)

~~~
diveanon
I live on a small island with poor cellular connection, so a phone number is
pointless anyways.

People explored the entire planet without phones, I can get by without WiFi
for a few hours.

When I visit more civilized societies where people have the expectation of
immediacy in communication I just plan my days when I wake up. My friends and
family all know that when you make plans with me it is usually more detailed
than "I'm not sure where we will be, I'll text you later."

I use apps for all of my day to day communication. Email is also one of my
main communication channels.

Some apps like PayPal are basically unusable without a phone number, so I
don't use them.

I get asked why I don't just buy a sim card when I visit other countries, and
it really just boils down to liking being disconnected and bored of seeing
people staring at their phones every time they are confronted with a problem.

------
sharperguy
Instead of these hyper-thin smartphones, can't we have one that's relatively
fat but where the battery lasts a few days, or even one whole day?

~~~
Kaiyou
You just have to buy one of them. But grabbing one for yourself you may decide
that thin is better after all.

~~~
seba_dos1
I'm still using my Nokia N900. It lasts a few days on battery and there's
still nothing better on the market, although I sometimes carry an old Galaxy
S3 to access banking app or to buy public transport tickets - however, I
sometimes have to do without them when its battery is flat :P

~~~
arpa
My n900 had usb charging trouble, and i had to get a "universal" battery
charger, and alternative batteries. I have even recased it - it is
surprisingly user-friendly in regards of repairs. However, i'm not nimble
enough with the soldering iron, so it gave way to jolla first, and finally i
succumbed to s8 later on, because swapping the batteries is just an ordeal.
Loved the thing madly, tho.

------
merricksb
Discussed at the time of publication in 2016:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11097994](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11097994)

(Shared for information purposes; not a dupe).

------
antisemiotic
All the issues except for "ruined web design" and to some extent "there are no
secure smartphones" seem to be solved by phones based on GNU/Linux rather than
Google/Linux. I'm very much looking forward to my preorder of Librem 5 and
being able to use it like a regular PC with any peripherals.

~~~
Mediterraneo10
The author says that smartphones suck because battery life limitations mean
you cannot use the full power of the phone's components. Librem admits that
they are aiming for a mere one day of use before you have to charge the
phone's battery, which is shorter than many Android devices these days.
Therefore, even the Librem phone may disappoint the author of this article.

~~~
looeee
That's a pretty obscure reason to say that smartphones suck though. If you
need more computing power, buy a tablet or a big battery pack, or use a
laptop. Hell, log into a remote server and run your apps there.

95% of people who use phones don't need that much power and given how many
people own phones they clearly find them extremely useful.

------
ninju
> With a PC, I don't have to perform some arcane operation to actually have
> control of the device.

I guess he does not have "user" accounts on his PC and runs everything under
the Administrator account

------
gflarity
OLD MAN YELLS AT CLOUD

Right off the bat the author has embarrassed themselves. They seem to be
oblivious to the fact that the majority of content on the most popular
platforms is created using smartphones (Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
Snapchat). Smartphones have actually democratized content creation and in a
way that laptops and desktops never could. This should be obvious, not sure
how this ever got upvoted.

Go take pictures with your laptop OP.

~~~
majewsky
While it may be true that the majority of Youtube content (by hours uploaded)
is created with smartphones, the majority of _worthwhile_ Youtube content very
much isn't.

