Discussing smartphone use with various people recently, I quickly come back to the same question - what do you need it for? This is not a masked way of saying they don’t need a smartphone, but a genuine question. I’m personally happy to accept that people use smartphones for a variety of reasons, from professional work, to having to pay for parking, and from medical technology to not having access to laptops or computers.
So maybe a stepping stone to better co-design of smartphone use is to be more open about what we need to use our phones for, and why we carry them around with us. This post, then, is a bit of an experiment to start surfacing thoughts. The question is applicable to all devices, but I figure a) better to start somewhere specific, and b) smartphones are a particularly “invasive” device. So…
Which functions on your smartphone do you feel you NEED it for, and why?
To start, I’d say there are some things I like to have my phone on me for - camera, photo editing, note-taking. But the things I probably need it for on the go are:
- Necessary contact from family and friends via phone call, text and (specific) group chats
- Parking apps, as paying by machine often isn’t available here
- Finding directions in strange places
- Access to passwords and one-time codes
- Transferring emergency funds to kids’ bank cards
- Checking my calendar
I guess there will be a lot of overlap, but that’s good to know. And it would also be interesting to know what less common cases exist: I think a mindful tech movement risks coming from a privileged position, and so awareness of these less common needs is all an essential part of the discussion.
There are no right or wrong answers here, just the opportunity to open up and find out from others :)
I’d add public transport to the list. Searching connections, booking tickets, navigating through large train stations etc.
I struggle to agree in the strict sense of need. But it’s a boiling frog scenario.
Public transport managers have mostly quit offering printed schedules and maps. IMO that’s borderline a violation of human rights (all people are entitled to equal access to public services, and I would consider providing info about public transport to be an indispensible part of that public service). Although in terms of smartphones, you can typically use a PC instead. And inside the stations you often have schedules and maps on the walls. But the bus infrastructure is dicier.
In Germany there are ticket sales with online exclusive pricing. Offline people must pay more for the same trip, or even lose access to some tickets entirely. Although a PC may still be an option there.
Yes, the question of how we define “need” is absolutely a key point here, and I guess I deliberately left it open to interpretation as I think it’s subjective, but also that how we define it can change as we think about it and question it too.
The online/offline benefits always irks me - I mean I get the economics behind pushing people to be more “convenient” (on behalf of the company, usually) but it avoids the entire conversation about digital exclusion and accessibility. Strangely, I often see parking rates cost more when you use the app, as you get charged for paying with their card service. Ho hum.
Sure, you don’t need apps, but they can save you hours of waiting if you can change your plans quickly, for example when a train is delayed or cancelled and you need to find other alternatives.
Yeah I agree, I’ll easily file public transportation apps as a need. During delays it can be vital. And have fun when you find yourself in an area new to you late at night after being out with friends and you don’t even know where the closest bus stop/train or subway station is, without a way to look it up on the phone. You definitely need an app to look that up and to plan your route home.
TBF I only browse Lemmy on my phone, it’s still mostly Reddit on the desktop
There’s nothing I can think of that is totally impossible without a smartphone. Just less convenient to varying degrees. Some of that is because of the fact that you’d need to carry several devices and/ or paper alternatives like we did in the dark ages. But some of it’s just because people expect everyone to be carrying a smartphone these days.
For Amazon returns I need to scan the QR code in the Amazon app at the post office. That could potentially be avoided by printing the QR code, but there’s no mechanism I know of at the moment to download the code.
I do check my email and online calendar when I’m out sometimes for details if I’m heading somewhere or checking when something is. This could be avoided by using a paper diary and printing out relevant emails.
For watching videos, listening to podcasts and checking Lemmy I’d either need to use a tablet, a laptop (which I generally use at home rather than my smartphone) or a dedicated audio player for the podcasts for portability.
Banking can be done via my laptop, phone call or in person at my local branch (for now).
Obviously phone calls and texts could be handled by a “dumb” phone.
Some restaurants ask you to order via their website or app but I’m sure if you kicked up enough of a fuss they’d find another way of handling that.
I rarely take photos or video but carrying a digital camera could replace the need of a smartphone for that. There are a lot of small, high quality options out there these days.
A smartphone is very useful for navigation but that could be taken care of with a handheld satnav device.
These days, basically everything I can. With few exceptions, such as long form reading or writing (code or otherwise) I use my phone. There are certainly better experiences for some things on a computer with a traditional keyboard and mouse, but so much of the world has come around to the fact that most people use mobile devices that many of services are just as good, if not better experiences with a touch screen.
When I’m not at work or writing code for pleasure I’m on my tablet or phone, that’s it’s really.
It’s assumed you have a phone on you at all times, so you get things like “contact us to check in”, “scan QR for time table” and digital locks that you open by phone. Of course banking is practically impossible without a phone.
I need my alarm and Google Maps and would be OK with my 10 year old phone that still works if it wasn’t for banks and such. Stuff like browsing and watching videos are better on a computer anyway.
Of course banking is practically impossible without a phone.
I’m a bit disgusted by the state of affairs that has inspired your comment. But I notice you say “phone” and not “smartphone”.
IMO, just about all banks require being reachable at a phone number (VOIP or mobile). Some banks have taken the extra shitty step of obligating customers to have a mobile phone number provably registered in their name which is then used for SMS 2fa verifications. Some even nastier banks have taken the abusive step of closing down their website and forcing customers to always have an up-to-date smartphone running their closed-source phone app which is exclusively available from Google or Apple.
All banks are shitty but at least today we still have the ability to reject the worst of the worst and go without a smartphone, AFAICT. Though this would vary from one country to another.
For my first bank I do everything on the app. If I log in through a browser, it requires me to scan a QR.
My second bank also requires the app to log on, but SMS would be an option too (so still a phone is needed).
My third one is Revolut, which can only be used with an app.
Some other investment platforms I use, all require SMS for phone verification.
I think it’s hard to find a bank that doesn’t require a phone. Maybe some banks can still send printed codes for additional fees or something.