[dotancohen]

  > Why on earth would you want apps to be able to intercept calls on a phone?

My daughter enlightened me to this recently.

Android devices are not phones. They are computers that come preinstalled with some apps, one of which is a phone app. Importantly: They are not marketed as PHONES. They are marked as "Smartphones". Just search for the word "phone" on the websites of any major Android device manufacturers.

The distinction is important.

Be careful when punishing children from "using the phone". Today, this means that they cannot use the app called "phone". This incident is a stark reminder that "phone" is an app today, not a physical device.

[quietbritishjim]

You are right that many younger people (and not only younger people) primarly think of those little black rectangles as computers with several apps. As you say, in their minds, making voice calls in the classical way just happens to be one of those apps rather than the device's primary function.

But you are dead wrong about the word "phone". It still means those little black rectangles. If you primarily think of those little black rectangles as computers (or social media machines) then the word "phone" has shifted meaning to match that. If you punish a child by banning them from "using the phone" you will absolutely get the horrified reaction you'd expect.

Of course words vary in meaning throughout the world and maybe "phone" really does mean the classical phone app in your area, or in your daughter's social group. But that's exceptional, regardless of age.

[dotancohen]

I'm basing the definition on the usage of words by the companies which manufacture and market the devices. See the usage of the words "phone" and "smartphone" on the LG, Samsung, and Xiaomi websites.

Apparently, the "phone" in "smartphone" is about as relevant as is the "fun" in "funeral".

[Izkata]

The evolution of the meaning is even more obvious in at least one other language: Japanese borrows the English word "smartphone" for those, but uses "denwa" (with its own kanji) for non-smartphones.

[quietbritishjim]

Sure, I agree with that. (But also, what marketer would miss an easy opportunity to include "smart" in their product's description.) I was just talking about your last paragraph.

[hef19898]

I think you are right! Also thanks for reminding me that I'm pushing forty!

[hulitu]

Android devices are more like appliances than computers. C compilers ? No. Shells ? No. There are some BASIC interpreters thoght, which is a start.

[dragonwriter]

> Android devices are more like appliances than computers. C compilers ? No.

Yes, actually.

> Shells ? No.

Also, yes.

> There are some BASIC interpreters thoght, which is a start.

There are also Java, etc., IDEs with which you can develop full Android apps. And have been for nearly a decade, at least.

[HPsquared]

Termux lets you run a sandboxed Linux system (can even include a desktop environment, rendered via VNC). You can run C compilers and whatever else.

[dotancohen]

Sure, I'll accept that. But the point isn't that the devices _are_ something specific, rather, the point was that the device _isn't_ considered a phone by the manufacturers. "Phone" is one function of the device, but no even its major selling point.