I mean, exactly what recourse do you think you'll have once it stops working..?
You'll sell your not working truck (to who?) and buy a new one (that is also soft-locked because it was the only way to stay competitive?)?
Right to Repair: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvVafMi0l68
Also, the software vended by traditional car companies are usually bound with hardware and readily replaceable if a reboot can't solve the problem.
The point isn’t what you call it. OP’s point was and I agree that you don’t need to have full control over every device that can possibly run code. Just let it be a device that does its thing.
It’s the difference in people that want calm technology vs “power users”. I want the device to exist waiting on my input and even though I have deep knowledge of its internal systems and processes, I don’t care, I just want it to work, solve a problem for me, and I’ll put it away.
Go ahead and root your phone to do whatever actively complex thing you need... it’s a tool for me and I personally want the walled garden to prevent it from possibly not working when I need it.
I argue that if the device sends data to third parties over radio/internet and/or the manufacturer can remotely push updates that changes the devices behavior then users must have full control.
Something like that should become law.
Then manufacturers can keep devices locked down as long as they stay out of the surveillance game.
That's not how I read the op, who said "It's a phone, use it to call text and guide and browse some internet. That's it". The tone in that reads not like "you don't need to..." it reads like "you should not...", which I disagree with. I rarely use my phone to make calls. I use it as a multi-function tool of tremendous capability. If I wanted a simple flip phone, I would have bought one of those, instead.
With that said your truck analogy isn't perfect. Your truck will last as long as you keep it going. That can be 20 years or more. It would be more like having a truck that the doors do not lock anymore after 2 years and you cannot fix that you must buy a new truck if you don't want thieves.
The difference from phones is that a phone is a computer, and as such it has computer's endless potential. For some it can be just a phone, sure. But many people want to use it as an extension of their mind, as knowledge management tool, as a creative tool, etc. The frustrating bit is that is many aspects phones are much nicer and better suited for such tasks than regular desktop computers (think portability, having cameras & sensors etc), yet because of these walled gardens it's much harder for a knowledgeable person to leverage this potential.
For pure pocket sized computing, why not use RPi? It's both much cheaper, more customizable, and it runs Linux. With enough tweaking you can make it run completely headless, plug-and-run mini computer that you can ssh over local network.
I think the biggest problem with the combining idea is that computing in general is about productivity, and phone is about phone stuff.
Pinephone is basically a smarthpone shaped SBC, with much better software situation than rpi, and you can use it as such. I ssh into mine all the time. You can connect anything you like to it via USB hub, incl. the full keyboard and mouse. You can use bluetooth keyboard, and just do normal computing you'd do on your dekstop, etc.
Except for small display and lower performance there's no differnece.
With a Pencil and Procreate, it's really hard to beat for drawing and illustrating. With an external keyboard and some kind of stand writing is a joy, I like it better than on a proper computer because of a ton of little things that help me keep focused and because the device is so portable and doesn't have the laptop form factor with a permanently attached keyboard, with bluetooth periphery it's more like a wireless battery-powered external screen.
Light to medium spreadsheet work is also totally doable, and I've build dozens of slide decks in various apps, with hand-drawn illustrations.
I use a Pi as a mini server, but doing creative work on one, I can't imagine that to be as nice and slick as on the iPad. Last time I tried the PiOS desktop, it definitely wasn't.
I use it for chat apps, phone calls (usually via chat apps), and occasionally wandering around Imgur when it would be socially awkward to not be on my phone.
The rest of the time I've come to appreciate being present in the moment.
So yeah, I'm looking at the new generation of Linux phones with interest. If I can run the chat apps in a browser OK, then I think it might work for me.
Related, if in a group, everybody else disengages to be engrossed in their phone, it can be helpful to do the same if one does not want to demonstrate a vulnerable dependency on the generosity of their attention.
A lot of awkwardness comes down to self-perception of vulnerability.
Though if everyone else is on their phone, and the crowd is large enough, I find it fascinating to people-watch.
I do find it useful to sometimes be absorbed in my phone and not aware of what's going on around me. Or at least to have that impression.
Maybe it's time to call phones what they really are: pocket computers with a legacy voice call functionality that is increasingly irrelevant to anyone who isn't a Boomer.
Now, regarding the locked-down of both iOS and Android ecosystems, I can see both points of view. The majority of ordinary users need to be protected from increasingly sophisticated malware stealing their online banking credentials or other mischief, but power users also need to do whatever they want to do once they've signed a disclaimer
I don't necessarily agree with this, because this is the direction that everything is moving towards.
It is so much cheaper to embed an SOC into everything that needs some form of automated/assisted control. Not necessarily a good thing, but that's what is going to happen regardless.
Your fridge can become a pocket computer with refrigerating capability - but you'll still see it as a fridge. It's really about how you see and utilize these items.
Only if you have huge pockets ;)
Sadly this requires mobile Internet prices to at least match voice call prices, which is not the case in many (developed or not) parts of the world.
I've read that Tesla abstracted all that with electric signals coming from a computer, now a proprietary software system sits between my legs input and the brake pads.
What if it goes wrong? You can try to convince me that it is an RTOS where signals from the brake pedal have the highest priority. And it seems to be that way, but I'd rather not.
I've dealt with enough computer problem to trust some onboard computer that can receive updates from the internet over how I brake.
Per mile driven Teslas are the safest vehicle on the road. The software helps ensure the safe operation of the vehicle. It’s really not that scary. The software is overlaid on a pretty standard vehicle aside from tue fact that it uses electric motors instead of an internal combustion engine.
Have you ever been on a plane?
I don't really care what software is ran in my truck, as long as it works (And that's why I'll not buy a Tesla). It's a phone, use it to call text and guide and browse some internet. That's it.