I believe it. In this case instead of dumb phone it should be called minimized UI phone. I believe that saying it is a dumb phone is disingenuous as some will believe the Google tracking isn't there. If they entirely de-googled the phone they could call it a de-googled mini-UI phone. A proper dumb phone could run on standby for weeks especially with modern batteries and would not be dialing home to the Google mother ship or any other third parties. The original dumb phones could boot up in milliseconds not counting network negotiation time. FWIW some of us old timers do care what the OS and firmware are doing and just want a phone that does it's job of being a phone. I acknowledge that the SS7 network needed to be deprecated and replaced ages ago but Google and Apple are not what I had in mind. RCS should have been the job of wireless providers in my opinion given so much data already goes to them such as real time spell check.
It's that "maybe a very rudimentary calculator" part that would be the problem with trying to sell a dumb phone nowadays, I think. For some people calls, text, and a simple calculator would be perfect. For others though it would be calls, text, and a music player. Others would want calls, text, and a camera.
Back in the dumb phone days I would take some subset of these devices with me when I went out for the day:
• Calculator
• Music player
• Palm Pilot
• Camera
• GPS
I think a "dumb" phone would have to include most or all of those to really be commercially viable, although maybe the maker could make it work if they had several different models each with just a couple of those.
What I knew as a camera or music player only managed local files and was not internet enabled. Most today know a music player as a streaming client. If the internet went down most of them would not have any music at all. They also expect their camera can instantly share their photos with everyone via some big platform and AI or other algorithms will make suggestions or try to add captions. I still use cameras and music players that do not have network capabilities. I even have a physical calculator.
I think the overall goal is to remove distractions. For me it is also to stop AI and related psychological tools from becoming that embedded in my life. At some point I will just stop using a cell phone all together and I know I am not alone. Maybe alone here on HN but not alone outside of this chamber.
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/413657/iphone-detox-flip-...
https://www.newsweek.com/heres-why-tech-enthusiasts-are-embr...
https://fortune.com/2025/05/19/parents-alternative-device-fa...
https://slate.com/technology/2025/04/light-phone-iii-review-...
https://www.geekwire.com/2025/well-hello-from-landlines-to-d...
The problem is the extremely limited market for this sort of phone (and patchy support by network operators), rather than any real technical constraints.
In any case, we really need a true open platform, so that we aren't dependent on potentially hostile companies like Google and Apple.
Like. 20, 30, 40 years from now will we still just have Android and iOS ran by the echos of Google and Apple?
I would like to think with the spread of tech, and now maybe AI we could end up with 100s of hardware manufacturers, with dozens of OSs, some open and some close, all interacting with each other over well defined APIs.
I think the first step to that is solving the server problem, and or the addressable problem.
Today we are locked into these streams because it’s. It easy for normal people to get a server to handle receiving messages and notifications of generic sort and direct device messages are not possible because we don’t have a free and open way to register my device is on line.
I don’t have any real solutions for any is these problems as they all often require a constant source of funding.
The one I think will probably allow us to break free in some sort of p2p mesh overlay that allows messages to safely be relayed by untrusted devices.
Thoughts?
Something's got to give, from a device manufacturing point the thing _consumers_ need the most is probably cost. Keep the feature size, slash the cost so they can be sold more transistors.
Size doesn't even really matter that much anymore, but power consumption for work absolutely does. Possibly better interconnect technology and integration into larger physical packages (smaller overall footprint since all the big wires got taken out).
Who knows if someone wins a lottery of scientific discovery for either a more cost effective way to do stuff we already know how to do other ways, or for something completely new that breaks open space for new ideas.
I expect that to come true. We still have a Windows monopoly after 35-40 years.
*1 by them
*2 in my country, it is illegal to pay more than ~2000 euro in cash to a company as a natural person, or more than ~1000 euro in cash between two companies. Allegedly, it's to prevent tax fraud, but the transactions data is oh-so-very-good at profiling people!
As bad as the tracking part is, we're already getting profiled and sold based on card purchases anyway. Smart phone based payment does increase the amount of collectible data, but if it kills the practice of card skimming, that's probably a net win for society. I've never been hit by a skimmer and always tap to pay or check the terminal before putting my card in. Failing that, I use a CC where I can chargeback fraud and it becomes someone else's problem, rather than debit where the money comes off my account directly. I know people that have had their accounts drained by thieves using skimmer data, usually at gas pumps.
Call people for you, send a verbatim text, prompt a text to send it a certain way, answer any question, connect with MCP servers to retrieve data from other services, banks, etc… why browse the internet or social media manually when an AI can organize it all for you and feed it to you?
The Phone app doesn't even make my top 10.
I have a dumb phone, with multiple SIM cards, I used it to receive SMS messages from different countries where they restrict the phone numbers for services and it has to be a local number. But other than that, it's not useful at all.
I kind of agree that today's smartphones are too much. I'd be happier with a mobile web browser (probably something like what Firefox OS was trying to do). But of course that have to be popular enough for companies to start making proper web apps (I'm looking at pretty much every bank now).
throwawayffffas•8mo ago
What's up with the question?
unsnap_biceps•8mo ago
gjm11•8mo ago
(I think the "question" version of the title is correctly answered by Betteridge's Law, and the "statement" version is wrong if it's understood as claiming that a lot of people are choosing dumb phones.)
unsnap_biceps•8mo ago
Is the page title different for you?
gjm11•8mo ago