One could argue that a "phone" is not a personal computer, in the sense of the Altair or even the IBM PC. The original idea of the PC IMO was that an individual could afford their own computer and could set it up anywhere, e.g., in their home. Unless a person had their own PC, she was left to use computers owned and controlled by corporations, universities or other organisations. It was a time not so long ago when peoples' computer use was generally not 24/7, because people went home from work or school and there was no computer at home. Limiting "screen time" was easy.
Whether the "owner" of a "phone" has control over it is debatable. Corporations calling themselves "tech" companies comprised of sellout nerds can not only selectively prevent the "owner" from running software but can surreptitously, remotely, without informed consent, install and run software of their choosing on the "device". WTF. Meanwhile seeking to monitor all network and computer use by the owner, doing so with a sense of entitlement as they lack viable longterm business plans.1 Hence the ridiculous schemes like developer fees and "app stores". Apple will slowly keep ramping up data collection and advertising, boiling the frog.
A "personal computer" is a computer a person owns and controls. IMHO.
"Phones" can be beautiful appliances. We can admire them for many reasons. But calling them "personal computers" is a stretch, and honestly AFAICT no one does. FWIW, people refer to "phones" by other terms, such as "device". Mobile phones today contain computers, but that is about as far as we can make the comparison to the personal computer.
Arguably every new appliance does or will eventually contain a computer. That hardly means its owner will be able to control it. It's still possible to build a PC from parts and there are more small form factor development boards than ever before.
Apple reminds me of the diamond industry. How does it manage to charge such amounts of money for something that is so readily available. It sells people a story. De Beers is apparently now entering into the synthetic diamond businesss. Apple's next move should be similarly amusing.
Whether the "owner" of a "phone" has control over it is debatable. Corporations calling themselves "tech" companies comprised of sellout nerds can not only selectively prevent the "owner" from running software but can surreptitously, remotely, without informed consent, install and run software of their choosing on the "device". WTF. Meanwhile seeking to monitor all network and computer use by the owner, doing so with a sense of entitlement as they lack viable longterm business plans.1 Hence the ridiculous schemes like developer fees and "app stores". Apple will slowly keep ramping up data collection and advertising, boiling the frog.
A "personal computer" is a computer a person owns and controls. IMHO.
"Phones" can be beautiful appliances. We can admire them for many reasons. But calling them "personal computers" is a stretch, and honestly AFAICT no one does. FWIW, people refer to "phones" by other terms, such as "device". Mobile phones today contain computers, but that is about as far as we can make the comparison to the personal computer.
Arguably every new appliance does or will eventually contain a computer. That hardly means its owner will be able to control it. It's still possible to build a PC from parts and there are more small form factor development boards than ever before.
Apple reminds me of the diamond industry. How does it manage to charge such amounts of money for something that is so readily available. It sells people a story. De Beers is apparently now entering into the synthetic diamond businesss. Apple's next move should be similarly amusing.
1. Computers are cheap and getting cheaper.