Totally bad argument in justifying phone cameras. If you are having the expectation of getting photos of similar quality as shown on the page, my question is, how often do you have a high quality ring light on your person along with a stable tripod?
I think the pictures on that page are aspirational, to be sure... but my own experience with this camera system suggest that they're not out of reach.
Here's one of the first macro pictures I took with an iPhone 13 Pro a day or two after I got it, completely without stabilization, on a momentary stop while I was walking my dog: https://imgur.com/uux8RNS (I'm not saying I'm a good photographer; this is just for technical purposes. It's also unedited.)
Compare that to the "leaf illumination" picture in the article. The professional's picture is noticeably better, of course. But it's more a matter of framing and choice of subject than any hardware limitation.
Personally, I have a lot of ring lights because beauty and makeup brands give them for free with a lot of products.
But even without all of this, you can get great footage and photos.
Take a look at this spider that was walking around my sink for example.
The phone (pixel 3, already quite aged) did not have a lot of trouble to focus on it even if we are talking about a small spider that is only a few milimiter in size.
It's a video so focus comes and goes but the parts where the focus is set on the spider are quite clear (ignoring the upload compression).
I am no artist and was focusing more on the spider's behavior. Someone who is an artist could have snapped great macros at that moment.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/z2RALoGeXiAo6uHG6
Another example is this queen ant when it was in it's founding stage. The nanitics (first workers) are small even when it comes to ant scale. You can see them in great details and can even see the translucent parts of their gaster with the sugar water inside.
Again, I focused on the behavior more than the art. But an artist could have taken a photo instead of a video with great results.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/dmzMXLqG5v1cfFKx9
Both of those were candid moments that I happened to snap because I had my phone in my pocket while my 4k camera and my canon reflex were in their box in my desk.
I'm not sure what YouTuber you're referring to, but most popular photography YouTubers mostly use real cameras still. Occasionally they'll do a gimmick video where they use a phone, but it's the exception, not the rule.
Sure, but how often do you have them on your person in time to take candid photos?
I am in a lot of entomology and myrmecology online groups and people are able to take clear photos of insects that look like professional macro photos using their phones. Before that, only a handful of pro/powerusers were able to share this kind of quality.
When asked what camera he used, one popular youtuber (I cannot remember the exact context) explained that while expensive cameras are better on paper he often relies on his iPhone + a cheap ring light clipped on it. Animals often act in interesting ways when you are not ready for it. The ease of using the device that is in your pocket often outweight the potential increase in quality that would come from setting up a studio level setup. The best picture is the one you are able to take.