Seems more like the smartphone is becoming compulsory as e.g., people want to use more secure messaging systems like Signal, or banks insist on apps instead of websites (maybe for security reasons, maybe something more nefarious?)
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.
We're pretty rapidly nearing the end of transistor scaling with currently widely used technologies and materials.
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.
We can't have that. The banks insist on trusted*1 platforms for their apps and their apps are increasingly mandatory. I expect that not only cash use will be restricted*2 as it happend in many other parts of the world, but bank cards will be obsolete soon too, replaced by the unavoidable user-tracking app.
*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!
I have not been able to find many true dumb-phones. Most of the "dumb phones" are running Android and just hide most of the UI. A proper dumb phone would only have enough firmware and OS to make calls and text, maybe a very rudimentary calculator. AFAIK most of those are gone or depend on networks that have long since been shut down such as GSM in most places. With the engineering firmware they could display what cell site one was on along with the signal strength of each sector. That and the basic GSM spec was about it.
> A proper dumb phone would only have enough firmware and OS to make calls and text, maybe a very rudimentary calculator.
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.
I get what you are saying but the reason I mention calculator is that unless the internet has been completely compromised or enshittified, a calculator will not be tied to some distraction and tracking platform or service.
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.
For most people, the point is to have limited functionality. They could care less what the underlying operating system is. The companies developing the phones are most likely concerned about the development costs, since it is probably a safe bet that the market is so small that saving a few dollars per unit on manufacturing would not amount to much. In other words, they don't care about the operating system either.
For most people, the point is to have limited functionality. They could care less what the underlying operating system is.
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.
People don't realise this. new phones are just running optimised android, with UI workarounds as opposed to the super optimised systems that old nokias used to run.
When I hear "dumb phone" I think of a device that can make calls and send and receive SMS, maybe a game of Snake and a radio that uses headphones as an antenna, and that's it. But how often do people use these things?
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).
Sure but it's email too. And just checking that website again. It's like a fidget. Hands up. I am guilty of that more than most, but I do avoid all social media.
I suppose that’s true. I don’t have social media other than Substack and HN, and I silence almost all alerts (I find them annoying af). I do, however, compulsively check HN, so you are not alone in your guilt.
I think either they changed it or there's some A/B testing thing going on. For me too, the title is "The age of dumb phones is here".
(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.)
Just to be clear, the article text title for me is "The age of dumb phones is here" but the pages title is "Is America Headed for an Age of Dumb Phones?"
I'd love a dumb phone, but unfortunately kinda need authenticator and uber and some restaurant apps, also a camera. Now I just want a regular smartphone that can never install social media.
I tried switching to a dumb phone right before Covid. During Covid it suddenly became impossible to get food at most restaurants; I even walked to Chick-fil-A, who said that they Support mobile ordering, but they weren't taking orders inside, required a car to use the drive-through, and required an app on a mobile phone to order at their counter. It was impossible to get anything without a smartphone (or a car)
There are apps to block other apps/sites. Granted, working around the block is as simple as deleting the block, but they do have the ability for some extra friction.
I could imagine entirely app-free phones, the number one feature is an AI that does everything:
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?
Certainly not everyone who are giving them up. I do have a phone that I keep at home for 2FA for banks but I rarely use it otherwise. I don't use apps, and pretty much never take it outside. I hate phones with a passion, and if I didn't need it for 2FA, I would get a very basic dumbphone right away.
It's actually harder then ever to have a dumbphone because gsm, which most old nokias rely on, and helped give them such good battery life is being depracated almost everywhere, as is 3g.
Doable with Cat-M1, which supports VoLTE, has low cost modems with extremely low power consumption, and as a bonus has a 16-20dB link budget advantage over broadband LTE, so it'll work in many places where conventional handsets are unusable.
The problem is the extremely limited market for this sort of phone (and patchy support by network operators), rather than any real technical constraints.
Will we ever stop hearing about it if even if not?
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...
lol. Thank you for this.
Seems more like the smartphone is becoming compulsory as e.g., people want to use more secure messaging systems like Signal, or banks insist on apps instead of websites (maybe for security reasons, maybe something more nefarious?)
In any case, we really need a true open platform, so that we aren't dependent on potentially hostile companies like Google and Apple.
I think about this a lot.
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?
We're pretty rapidly nearing the end of transistor scaling with currently widely used technologies and materials.
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.
> will we still just have Android and iOS ran by the echos of Google and Apple?
I expect that to come true. We still have a Windows monopoly after 35-40 years.
We can't have that. The banks insist on trusted*1 platforms for their apps and their apps are increasingly mandatory. I expect that not only cash use will be restricted*2 as it happend in many other parts of the world, but bank cards will be obsolete soon too, replaced by the unavoidable user-tracking app.
*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!
True. And this applies to nearly all tech. Oligopolies(duopolies e.g. visa and mastercard) are pythons that are crushing society.
I have not been able to find many true dumb-phones. Most of the "dumb phones" are running Android and just hide most of the UI. A proper dumb phone would only have enough firmware and OS to make calls and text, maybe a very rudimentary calculator. AFAIK most of those are gone or depend on networks that have long since been shut down such as GSM in most places. With the engineering firmware they could display what cell site one was on along with the signal strength of each sector. That and the basic GSM spec was about it.
> A proper dumb phone would only have enough firmware and OS to make calls and text, maybe a very rudimentary calculator.
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.
I get what you are saying but the reason I mention calculator is that unless the internet has been completely compromised or enshittified, a calculator will not be tied to some distraction and tracking platform or service.
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.
For most people, the point is to have limited functionality. They could care less what the underlying operating system is. The companies developing the phones are most likely concerned about the development costs, since it is probably a safe bet that the market is so small that saving a few dollars per unit on manufacturing would not amount to much. In other words, they don't care about the operating system either.
For most people, the point is to have limited functionality. They could care less what the underlying operating system is.
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.
People don't realise this. new phones are just running optimised android, with UI workarounds as opposed to the super optimised systems that old nokias used to run.
Nokia phones?
KaiOS is not great. It is definitely not the cycle-optimized interface you might be used to from the 1990s or early 2000s.
https://www.amazon.com/Nokia-Unlocked-Charcoal-International...
When I hear "dumb phone" I think of a device that can make calls and send and receive SMS, maybe a game of Snake and a radio that uses headphones as an antenna, and that's it. But how often do people use these things?
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).
It sounds like people just hate social media. One needn’t have a social media account to have a smartphone.
Social media brainrot has infiltrated public spaces, prompting a growing backlash: https://youtu.be/tFP5mrwRa1M
Rage-farming is brainrot, too. The kind that tends to create an in-group fed up with "the degenerates" of an out-group.
Sure but it's email too. And just checking that website again. It's like a fidget. Hands up. I am guilty of that more than most, but I do avoid all social media.
I suppose that’s true. I don’t have social media other than Substack and HN, and I silence almost all alerts (I find them annoying af). I do, however, compulsively check HN, so you are not alone in your guilt.
The title is "The age of dumb phones is here"
What's up with the question?
It's the web page title.
I think either they changed it or there's some A/B testing thing going on. For me too, the title is "The age of dumb phones is here".
(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.)
Just to be clear, the article text title for me is "The age of dumb phones is here" but the pages title is "Is America Headed for an Age of Dumb Phones?"
Is the page title different for you?
Ah, duh, I see. Yes, indeed the <title> is the question while the text heading is the statement. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I'd love a dumb phone, but unfortunately kinda need authenticator and uber and some restaurant apps, also a camera. Now I just want a regular smartphone that can never install social media.
I tried switching to a dumb phone right before Covid. During Covid it suddenly became impossible to get food at most restaurants; I even walked to Chick-fil-A, who said that they Support mobile ordering, but they weren't taking orders inside, required a car to use the drive-through, and required an app on a mobile phone to order at their counter. It was impossible to get anything without a smartphone (or a car)
Some of these are definitely possible. I build apps for dumb phones. Most non-Android platforms rely on the web for some form of app
https://developer.cloudfone.com/
There are apps to block other apps/sites. Granted, working around the block is as simple as deleting the block, but they do have the ability for some extra friction.
iPhone Assistive Access can password-restrict usage to app subset, https://support.apple.com/guide/assistive-access-iphone/set-...
So, you want parental controls for yourself.
No the current smartphones are dumb we need smarter smart phones. AI PHONES.
only 2% market share for dumb phones so why are all these articles acting is if 90% people threw away their smart phone?
The fundamental ignorance of these devices is that they all seem to assume that the one thing a phone should do is make calls.
The Phone app doesn't even make my top 10.
“Phones” considered an unnecessary qualifier.
I could imagine entirely app-free phones, the number one feature is an AI that does everything:
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?
Clearly not. People absolutely fucking love their phones. They may say otherwise but their actions tell the truth.
Certainly not everyone who are giving them up. I do have a phone that I keep at home for 2FA for banks but I rarely use it otherwise. I don't use apps, and pretty much never take it outside. I hate phones with a passion, and if I didn't need it for 2FA, I would get a very basic dumbphone right away.
Right, when I said “people” I wasn’t referring to you specifically.
One could similarly argue that alcoholics "love" booze.
One certainly could try. Would that one be you?
It's actually harder then ever to have a dumbphone because gsm, which most old nokias rely on, and helped give them such good battery life is being depracated almost everywhere, as is 3g.
Doable with Cat-M1, which supports VoLTE, has low cost modems with extremely low power consumption, and as a bonus has a 16-20dB link budget advantage over broadband LTE, so it'll work in many places where conventional handsets are unusable.
The problem is the extremely limited market for this sort of phone (and patchy support by network operators), rather than any real technical constraints.
Given the US administration’s attacks on education, science, and plain old facts I’m guessing that we’re headed for a plain old Age of Dumb.
Bravery level: 11/10 <http://imgur.com/ToQFh>