I'm not up for an essay on this subject (and no one wants one anyway) but will drop in a quick POV: Basically - Everyone needs a multi-capable computer/camera/phone in their pocket/purse, not everyone needs a very capable camera (sort of a "one trick pony") - Phones benefitted much thru fast tech improvements and fast growing larger market share (at a time when this sort of tech was exploding in general), for folks desiring devices that are easy to use and require much less "training" {in general), than what we know as advanced photography and photographic devices. Paired with powerful computing capabilities/vast usage networks for the general public, an army of app builders/developers, and skilled marketing, they came along at the right time with the right stuff.

Cameras have always been seen as something of a heavy knowledge based bit of magic, hard to learn/understand/use for the average person. They are considered a pro-tool or luxury item, and what I always hear - "takes too much time to learn, it's hard, I just want to point and shoot and send my pic, I don't need all that photo tech" etc. etc. as opposed to general phone usage/computing/internet reach/usage/games & social media posters, quick click post send, thank you man!!

Phones and their usage systems are also heavily subsidized (unlike cameras) through a number of plans/sales gimmicks almost forced replacement due to constant upgrades and the physical frailties of the devices, they role over nearly yearly. Because there is so much money to be made, the faster path to profit is going to get the developement money/promotional efforts/plans that encourage replacement in a constant cycle/etc... Remember, cameras don't have a dedicated network buyin like phones and while the devices themselves make a profit, the marketing of the "phone plans" and subsequent public buyin has brought about a huge money making machine for the phone industry, one that will be promoted to the heavens. While they have tried to do that with cameras, the general "need" is not there like it is with the phone systems - people "need" their phones, a camera is a luxury item.....

My $.02 Peace.

I asked the question this evening, "Why do phones have more advanced technology than cameras" and part of the answer, "One reason why phones may have more advanced technology than commercial cameras is that phones have a larger and more diverse user base than cameras. According to a report by Statista1, there were about 5.22 billion unique mobile phone users in the world as of January 2021, compared to about 1.43 billion digital camera users in 2022. This means that phone manufacturers have more potential customers and more incentive to invest in research and development of new features and technologies for their devices"

Phones keep getting better and many are cheaper, the flagship phones continue to be the most expensive. I'm not getting rid of my Canon 90D and lenses but I'm very hesitant to change when really our newest cameras all brands are living in old technology compared to phones. In 1980 cell phones were a huge brick, with no text, no camera and they were dumb as a brick but they were a mobile phone. I read that the first shared cell phone pic was in 1997. Maybe the dates and info are off but the cameras we know and love/hate are falling behind and it doesn't appear that the big companies care or have a plan to meet the challenge. What are your thoughts?

My background is in Electrical (electrician) HVAC and circuit and component repairs (electronics) building and repairs on PCs and a lifelong photographer. I don't build PCs anymore and the most recent thing I've done is put memory in a laptop. I know that cell phones are made by computerized machines because I know most stuff is so small that I would not be able to make repairs. Car and truck engines back in the day probably up into the fifties were straightforward and many of us could tell how they were put together and work on them. I still change the oil and do my own brakes and minor repairs. I get it that modern cameras are a marvel yet the only big change is the medium that we capture the pictures on a chip rather than film. (Oh and at one time I processed my own black & white film and had my own darkroom to process prints.)

With AI and cell phone cameras, we are at a crossroads and we depend on the camera companies to do the right thing and keep competitive and keep up with technology. I don't think there is one of them that uses an open-market operating system such as Android. HVAC controls have had the same issue for the past thirty years and they resist making the change and the consumers suffer because of it.

I am a hobbyist woodworker and have some really old tools and value them but have over the years bought cordless battery tools that do a great job because the technology has gotten better. Cameras are somewhat like that but cellphone photography has changed the playing field. I get it that cell phones have not got to the point where they can replace point-and-shoot or cameras that have changeable lenses or is there anything in the near term future yet they are leading the way and cameras will be left behind unless there is a major change. I have a couple of Kodac 120 1900 or so cameras in a curio display. I'm sure I can find some film and could take some pictures and even develop them if I had the equipment but why? My Canon 90D is so far more advanced than those cameras it is amazing yet with today's technology it won't be long before the 90D is sitting on the same shelf.

Remember when we had photo albums and how amazing quick print corner stores that could turn prints around in less than three days? At the time how great was that, Today it's just a picture in the review mirror for some of us but for many, we would have to explain it.

My question why are the camera companies not embracing new technology /software? Why do they resist so much and hold onto the past? Why do some adopt while others continue to resist? If for nothing else it would be good for all of us to ask ourselves and others why.

There is one aspect of the difference between Smart Phone cameras and 'Enthusiast/ Professional Cameras, and that is design intent.
While it is certainly true that the market for cell phone sized chips is vastly larger than the market for large sensor cameras and that far more research is done there, but it is only half the story.
The Cell phone sensor/ processor is refined toward ease of use and automatic results.
Large sensor cameras are designed to allow vastly more control, but require more technical literacy to choose and use them. Both approaches are appropriate for the two different Design Intents
Both are technological marvels and both are Different from each other. That difference should be celebrated.

I asked the question this evening, "Why do phones have more advanced technology than cameras" and part of the answer, "One reason why phones may have more advanced technology than commercial cameras is that phones have a larger and more diverse user base than cameras. According to a report by Statista1, there were about 5.22 billion unique mobile phone users in the world as of January 2021, compared to about 1.43 billion digital camera users in 2022. This means that phone manufacturers have more potential customers and more incentive to invest in research and development of new features and technologies for their devices"

Phones keep getting better and many are cheaper, the flagship phones continue to be the most expensive. I'm not getting rid of my Canon 90D and lenses but I'm very hesitant to change when really our newest cameras all brands are living in old technology compared to phones. In 1980 cell phones were a huge brick, with no text, no camera and they were dumb as a brick but they were a mobile phone. I read that the first shared cell phone pic was in 1997. Maybe the dates and info are off but the cameras we know and love/hate are falling behind and it doesn't appear that the big companies care or have a plan to meet the challenge. What are your thoughts?

LOL, understand your thoughts completely. Needs are subjective, I was generalizing.....

I'm a radioguy, even though everyone tells me it's a dead hobby, I talk to folks all over world, and with latest Solar Cycle in action, we have large "roundtable" sessions nightly and I talk to the same operators in Australia/NZ/Tasmania/South Pacific almost daily, from Florida (and other parts of the world). We all have computers and phones and could easily communicate that way, but radio takes effort/knowledge/DIY capability (and yes some money is involved) much like photography it always feels like quite an accomplishment.....whether licensed or pirate, it's always fun.

IMHO, actual cell phones communications will only advance when they include 'duplexing' otherwise people are still just paying for high-priced cell system Walkie Talkies where there's no PTT..... I'd pay a lot more just to be able to interrupt my wife when she's talking on a cell phone....