Smart Phone silliness

[Scott O]

Originally Posted by imwjl

Forgetting a particular sales agent, franchise or shop wanting to make a sale, it's not silliness to try and market a phone with all of the radio specs known as 5G, WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.2 or newer. It's not silliness to push and market the first tier phones.



On the value or reliability or "silliness", my department has 200+ Apple and Android mobile in management, and we support just shy of 1000 employees who mostly use smart phones for their HR and scheduling matters. The first tier stuff just plain works relative to what's out there.



It's really stressful on a lot of staff when there are service and reliability matters and it's expensive in real time and mental baggage so that's another reason to have good stuff.



Our Android has grown back to about 30% because of two particular solutions and apps and for Android is extra important to go first tier. That's a security matter as much as reliability.



The why for the radio specs I pointed out is it means you have what works best and will work the longest. The "5G" is network infrastructure that's now and the future. Top tier and commercial grade WiFi is becoming if not a WiFi 6 world like 5G. Bluetooth 5.2 probably pre-dates the two Samsung mentioned and means you will get the wonderful class of sound peripherals available.



In my personal experience, a 2 year old but 5G, WiFi 6 and newer Bluetooth phone combined with first tier carrier means I don't need a land line and I never seem to have the bothers or lack of function people around me experience.



Our CFO has calculated first tier phones and carriers cost less once 2-5 years pass. Our Apple stuff costs less than the Android over time. It might seem counterintuitive but that's via longevity, repairability, resale, training and support.

I have no idea what you just said, imwjl, but I totally agree.

[Mr. Jelly]

I think that not having a smart phone in today's world is like a person not being able to read in days of old. Only the old people can get away with it.

[fitness1]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jelly

I think that not having a smart phone in today's world is like a person not being able to read in days of old. Only the old people can get away with it.

I have 4 computers that I'm near all the time.

And when I'm not, I don't care to be "connected" other than the basic function of my telephone.

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jelly

I think that not having a smart phone in today's world is like a person not being able to read in days of old. Only the old people can get away with it.

I think there's a nice irony there with the use of the word 'smart.' In the present day, many devotees of smart-phone use and technology often seem to represent the very antithesis of smart! In fact, 'cell-phone smart' seems a poor substitute for 'reading-smart.'

[imwjl]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jelly

I think that not having a smart phone in today's world is like a person not being able to read in days of old. Only the old people can get away with it.

That's likely true and has been an interesting observation. My mother in law RIP tried and couldn't drop the cognitive biases that made it hard. She deserved much credit for trying. My same age 90 year old mother pursues it as a challenge and also part of what she feels is discipline needed to keep aging well.

One bank I uses forces technology for security where I know that's hard on some but if you go the bank lobby they are very helpful.

A tough version of this is people needing to learn for the work place. There are people age 65 plus in the workplace who need these tech basics for work tasks but also just to access schedules, HR and payroll info. We have 2-3 iPads that float at each work site and another 1-2 in the office of each HR assistant. It's horribly sad when with much help someone just won't give the right try.

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by ewalling

I think there's a nice irony there with the use of the word 'smart.'

I haven't yet reflected on that, but of course there is. There's nothing "smart" about these phones. Originally they were intended to help their owners do things in a smarter (as in, more efficient) way: a personal assistant (remember those?) with built-in phone. Very often I wonder if that's still the case.
A longtime friend of mine has always referred to his mobieltje (mobile phone) as his debieltje (from the Dutch term for a mentally debilitated person if that's not clear). That was from long before we had actual "smartphones", but I think the term has only become more appropriate.

Technophobia, the unwillingness to keep adapting to yet new technological progress is orthogonal to all that, but something we'll all have to deal with at some point. I notice it in myself (a bit to my dismay, a bit without surprise). I'm not at all happy about gmail's increasing security hubbub which means they now require 2-factor auth in order to be able to continue to use "legacy" IMAP clients via app-specific passwords (which aren't app-specific at all). (I'm hoping that at least puts an end to the silly [sic!] email warning telling me they blocked my access because it was from an as-yet unknown location ... which of course I wouldn't be able to see >:-( )

And don't get me started on getting around all these new-fangled measures for / in name of my demented mother who is (sadly, apparently) still alive but incapable to do these things herself. Fortunately the consensus in France and (a little less) the Netherlands is still that having a smartphone is not an obligation.
.

[FrankHudson]

I had a Palm early in their life, and one of the earliest true Smart Phones (Treo, if anyone remembers). Business calendars, email, contacts, even a calculator were useful, nigh onto required professionally.

I no longer work for someone else and I'm decades older. Now, I'm not so sure. My old and getting no better bad eyesight and fumble fingers doesn't like the smaller screen (I have a reasonably large screen phone, still...) I thought about just using an iPad mini (about as small a screen as I can tolerate happily). I much prefer using a computer or at least a tablet.

Too few have mentioned two big drivers for smart phone usage: camera and audio player in the thread. Yes, standalone digital cameras can be better, but are bulky and for most of us a purposeful carry. And an audio player that can play reasonably good approximations of just about any recording at a moment's notice and output high quality ones stored locally is a marvel I could never have imagined in my youth. And video too.

[imwjl]

Originally Posted by RJVB

I haven't yet reflected on that, but of course there is. There's nothing "smart" about these phones. Originally they were intended to help their owners do things in a smarter (as in, more efficient) way: a personal assistant (remember those?) with built-in phone. Very often I wonder if that's still the case.
A longtime friend of mine has always referred to his mobieltje (mobile phone) as his debieltje (from the Dutch term for a mentally debilitated person if that's not clear). That was from long before we had actual "smartphones", but I think the term has only become more appropriate.

Technophobia, the unwillingness to keep adapting to yet new technological progress is orthogonal to all that, but something we'll all have to deal with at some point. I notice it in myself (a bit to my dismay, a bit without surprise). I'm not at all happy about gmail's increasing security hubbub which means they now require 2-factor auth in order to be able to continue to use "legacy" IMAP clients via app-specific passwords (which aren't app-specific at all). (I'm hoping that at least puts an end to the silly [sic!] email warning telling me they blocked my access because it was from an as-yet unknown location ... which of course I wouldn't be able to see >:-( )

And don't get me started on getting around all these new-fangled measures for / in name of my demented mother who is (sadly, apparently) still alive but incapable to do these things herself. Fortunately the consensus in France and (a little less) the Netherlands is still that having a smartphone is not an obligation.
.

The smartphone is not an obligation in the US but the security matters you bring up aren't much or any different than the sagacity with stuff like public health or roads having rules.

The poor habits or abuse elements make me think of other stuff. Some don't or can't manage eating, alcohol or sex as should be. We don't outlaw those for those who can.

InfoSec and the phones are kind of separate matters but both are good revolutions overall. Long after seeing the potential in the beginning, I had attitude altering experiences seeing how the technology aids the working poor near me and troubled places far away that I've visited or where I have family and friends.

[fitness1]

Originally Posted by ewalling

I think there's a nice irony there with the use of the word 'smart.' In the present day, many devotees of smart-phone use and technology often seem to represent the very antithesis of smart! In fact, 'cell-phone smart' seems a poor substitute for 'reading-smart.'

I just got back from the golf course and I was telling my 80 year old buddy about the comment - he has a flip phone that he almost NEVER uses. Guess what, he also reads more than anyone I know.

[imwjl]

Originally Posted by ewalling

I think there's a nice irony there with the use of the word 'smart.' In the present day, many devotees of smart-phone use and technology often seem to represent the very antithesis of smart! In fact, 'cell-phone smart' seems a poor substitute for 'reading-smart.'

Originally Posted by fitness1

I just got back from the golf course and I was telling my 80 year old buddy about the comment - he has a flip phone that he almost NEVER uses. Guess what, he also reads more than anyone I know.

I suggest more care with your stereotyping. A smartphone is a very mainstream tool world-wide. That includes reading and not just the face buried in Facebook or TikTok stereotype.

I'm not a gamer and maybe an exception with so many reading apps and books on mine but I know it's very mainstream.

[12barBill]

Originally Posted by imwjl

I suggest more care with your stereotyping. A smartphone is a very mainstream tool world-wide. That includes reading and not just the face buried in Facebook or TikTok stereotype.

I'm not a gamer and maybe an exception with so many reading apps and books on mine but I know it's very mainstream.

Sometimes... methinks thou dost protest too much.

[fitness1]

Originally Posted by imwjl

I suggest more care with your stereotyping. .

Just reacting to the comment that if you don't have one, it will be like not being able to read.

I've managed to run my own business (and life) over the last couple decades VERY well without one.

It's just NOT essential or wanted for some of us. No stereotyping, just the reality of the situation.

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by fitness1

I just got back from the golf course and I was telling my 80 year old buddy about the comment - he has a flip phone that he almost NEVER uses. Guess what, he also reads more than anyone I know.

The exception that proves the rule!

[619TF]

Originally Posted by fitness1

Just reacting to the comment that if you don't have one, it will be like not being able to read.

I've managed to run my own business (and life) over the last couple decades VERY well without one.

It's just NOT essential or wanted for some of us. No stereotyping, just the reality of the situation.

And yet you say you have 4 computers near you at almost all times. The true reality of the situation is that a "smartphone" is just a really tiny computer so yes, you don't need to use the phone because you have 4 other options for the same data. Not all of us are so "lucky" to have non-phone computer devices near us almost all the time and thus the popularity of smartphones.

[rllink]

My wife has a smart phone and she still reads books. Crime novels mostly, she always has. The smart phone has not changed that. You don't have to quit reading books if you have a smart phone any more than having a flip phone makes you a reader.

I got a lecture a few years ago on smart phone etiquette from a twenty year old. My last retirement job before I quit working was at a large aquatic center. My job was to hire, set up training and schedule employees. I had over a hundred kids on my payroll. They would self schedule on an app that we had. I would then go in a few days before and fill any gaps in the schedule. At first I would try to call them and they wouldn't answer and it aggravated me. I was maligning the kids for not answering their phone one morning to a twenty year old deck supervisor and she told me to text them. She said that calling was rude. They could be in class, or trying to sleep in, or just out with their friends. Just text them and they would get back. So I did and it worked. They got back to me pretty quickly.

I took her remark about rudeness with a grain of salt though, she was a kid. But just the other day one of my flip phone friends called me while I was sitting having a late lunch in a nice restaurant with some friends. I just turned off the ringer when I saw who it was. He left me a voice mail to call him. When we were done eating I texted and asked what he needed. He called me back because he wanted to change the time that we were going to have coffee later in the week. And because he is an old grump he said it was rude that I didn't answer my phone when he called. I told him it was rude to interrupt me in the middle of my meal just to change the time, when he could text me. His excuse was that it was hard to text on his flip phone and that he didn't do texts anyway. I told him not my problem.

During this whole fiasco I was thinking about that deck supervisor. It was all good back in the day when you didn't have a phone in your pocket and you couldn't just pull it out and call someone on a whim. Now it has just gotten intrusive. I'm not at someone's beck and call just because we both have a cell phone. So I guess my point is, trying to judge things on yesterdays standards is not valid. There is a new set of rules. Things change and one can't expect the world to drag their feet just for them.

By the way, thanks for listening.