The reason I never bought a smartphone was that I don't want what is essentially a second computer always with me. That's more important to me than being able to search anything anytime.
I'm a programmer who spends too much time on the computer. And the problem is not the time I spend but my mindset while I'm on it. I adopt an idleness and unwillingness to do anything off the computer. Worse, just having access to a computer makes me less likely to do other things. Should I read a new book, or go on the computer? If I have a computer next to me, it's simply more comfortable to go on it than to open a book.
A smartphone would do to me what a computer already does. And for those who have the same problem as me, I'd argue that in this case the perspective of someone without a smartphone is less biased than that of someone who does.
I pretty much came to the comments to write what brandonhsiao did (only at less detail).
Two more things I can add though:
- A smartphone is sort of a replacement to a computer but not a very good one at that. Typing's more fiddly, last I checked the SSH clients were annoying, you don't have that much freedom out of the box.
- My £5 phone is nigh indestructible compared to your average smartphone. I can throw it about as much as I want to (though I've never felt the need to) and if it breaks, I'm not too fussed about it. Nobody in their right mind would want to steal it, but if they do, I don't have to worry about any of my data or accounts being exposed.
I feel the same way. With my smartphone in my pocket, I ended up whipping it out at every second of downtime to read... anything. Twitter, HN, news.
That's not an indictment of smartphones but of myself. My wife does just fine with a smartphone, taking it out only to check her calendar.
My solution: dumbphone in my pocket, Nexus 7 tablet in my bag. If I leave home without a bag, I won't need more than a phone. Otherwise, I have access to maps, mail, etc. but need to make a conscious decision to take it out - and look ridiculous when I walk around with it, which helps with the addictive part as well.
I have an old smartphone, but I don't pay for internet. That brings my monthly bill to around 3€, and I have music, maps, photo and video, calender, ... no mail though, which is fine because I have told everyone to just call or text me if it's urgent enough.
I use my smartphone to read books. I use it to listen to audiobooks. I download educational videos (coursera courses and the like) and watch them on my smartphone during my bus commute. There are many other ways I could use it other than mindlessly browsing the web.
I believe it's not the device to blame, but the person making use (or misuse) of it.
To avoid distractions, I find it useful to place it into "flight mode".
This very idea of "blaming" either the device or the person is bafflingly uninteresting, improductive, and useless.
Forgive the analogy, you're pretty much the guy telling someone with alcohol problems that "I drink a couple of microbrews now and then, it's very tasty. You don't have to drink every day. Don't blame the beer, blame yourself!"
Well, that's a decent analogy. So the guy with alcohol problems can either lock himself up somewhere to make sure he is cut off from any form of alcohol (an inhabited island, maybe?), or find a way to address his problems so that he can live a normal life.
I guess both solutions are valid, it's a matter of preference.
My personal opinion is that my solution is taking more control of my life. "I choose how to use a device to my benefit". Other solution seems to be applying external restrictions to supplement the lack of control. "I can not control my urge to disuse the device, so I'd better throw it away, lock it up etc.". I like my approach more, but both are valid of course.
The important point is that choosing to not have a smartphone is a totally valid way to "address [one's] problems" in order to "live a normal life," and I think it's uncharitable to dismiss it as some kind of escapism or isolation.
I mean, come on — preferring a low-tech phone is not like fleeing to an uninhabited island. To use my (perhaps silly) analogy, it's more like choosing not to keep any booze at home. Or to leave home without a hip flask. ;)
Think about how weird it is that you would consider not having a smartphone as equivalent to "locking oneself up somewhere." Almost nobody had a smartphone until 2008.
I'm a programmer who spends too much time on the computer. And the problem is not the time I spend but my mindset while I'm on it. I adopt an idleness and unwillingness to do anything off the computer. Worse, just having access to a computer makes me less likely to do other things. Should I read a new book, or go on the computer? If I have a computer next to me, it's simply more comfortable to go on it than to open a book.
A smartphone would do to me what a computer already does. And for those who have the same problem as me, I'd argue that in this case the perspective of someone without a smartphone is less biased than that of someone who does.