While Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg talk publicly about brain chips, smart tattoos and augmented reality glasses, Apple boss Tim Cook is quietly betting that the device in your pocket still has a long life ahead. The result is an increasingly sharp clash over what comes after the mobile era — or whether that era is even close to ending.
The billionaires who want to kill the smartphone
Smartphones have ruled daily life for roughly two decades. For Musk, Gates and Zuckerberg, that reign is nearing its end. Each of them is funnelling money and attention into technologies they believe can push phones to the margins.
Elon Musk and the idea of thinking your way online
Elon Musk’s vision leans heavily on Neuralink, his brain–computer interface company. The firm is already testing implants that allow people with paralysis to control a computer cursor just by thinking.
In Musk’s roadmap, the screen, keyboard and even handheld device slowly fade, replaced by a direct link between brain and machine.
Musk argues that phones are a clumsy bottleneck. Our thumbs can only type so fast. Our eyes can only scan so many notifications. A neural implant, in theory, removes that friction and lets humans interact with software at the speed of thought.
The long-term bet is that once such interfaces become safe, affordable and widely accepted, a slab of glass in your hand will feel as dated as a rotary phone.
Bill Gates’ bet on electronic tattoos
Bill Gates has been intrigued by so‑called “electronic tattoos” — flexible patches or inks printed directly on the skin. These devices can host nanoscale sensors, track health data, and potentially send and receive information wirelessly.
The concept turns the body itself into a connected interface, blurring the line between wearable tech and biology.
In this scenario, a tattoo on your wrist could monitor your heart, authenticate your identity, and even act as a secure payment device. Notifications might surface as subtle haptic pulses or changing colours, not as pop‑ups on a phone.
Gates sees this path as a way to make computing less intrusive and more health‑centric, while still giving people instant access to data.
Mark Zuckerberg and glasses that replace the screen
Mark Zuckerberg, through Meta, is pushing a different replacement: lightweight augmented reality (AR) glasses. The company is already investing billions into mixed‑reality headsets and working toward everyday eyewear that overlays digital information directly onto your field of view.
For Zuckerberg, the ultimate device sits on your nose, not in your pocket, freeing your hands and eyes from a fixed screen.
In his view, phones trap people in a rectangle. AR glasses could show messages floating beside you, navigation arrows on the pavement and virtual objects in your living room. If that vision works, phones might become optional, much like desktop PCs have for younger users.
Tim Cook’s different reading of the future
Tim Cook stands almost alone among Big Tech leaders in refusing the “post‑smartphone” story. From his perspective, the smartphone is still evolving rather than collapsing.
Apple’s iPhone remains one of the most profitable products in consumer history. But Cook’s argument goes beyond revenue. He sees the phone as a flexible platform that can absorb many of the new technologies others frame as replacements.
Instead of asking what comes after the smartphone, Cook is asking how far the smartphone itself can stretch.
Coexistence, not extinction
Apple has already woven elements of artificial intelligence and augmented reality into the iPhone. Features like on‑device machine learning for photos, live text recognition, health tracking and spatial content through the camera are small steps in that direction.
Cook’s strategy can be summed up as coexistence:
- Integrate AR through the camera and companion headsets, while keeping the phone as the central hub.
- Use AI on the device to make the phone more personal and private.
- Let wearables like the Apple Watch or future glasses extend the phone rather than replace it outright.
Under this model, AR glasses might rely on the iPhone for connectivity and processing. Brain–computer interfaces or biometric tattoos, if they mature, could still sync with a phone as their main controller.
A solar belt around the Moon by 2035?
Why Cook thinks the smartphone still has an edge
Beyond corporate self‑interest, Cook has a few practical factors on his side.
| Technology | Main promise | Main friction |
|---|---|---|
| Brain implants | Instant, hands‑free control | Surgery, safety fears, regulation |
| Electronic tattoos | Health tracking, discreet connectivity | Durability, privacy, social acceptance |
| AR glasses | Information in your field of view | Design, battery life, social norms |
| Smartphones | Versatile, familiar, app ecosystem | Screen addiction, physical bulk |
Billions of people already carry a smartphone. Most are comfortable paying with it, working on it and using it for entertainment. No implant, patch or headset can match that ubiquity yet.
There are also cultural and ethical hurdles. Many people are uneasy about having electronics inside their bodies. Even smart glasses have met resistance, from concerns over constant filming to worries about distraction in public spaces.
Cook is effectively betting that people will accept smarter phones and companion devices long before they accept invasive or always‑on alternatives.
What these futures could feel like in everyday life
Imagine three ordinary mornings a decade from now.
In the Musk‑style future, you wake up, think “weather”, and feel a tiny buzzing in your head as a neural implant shares the forecast via a subtle visual in your mind. No phone, no screen, but a heavy trade‑off in terms of surgery and constant connectivity.
In the Gates scenario, an electronic tattoo on your forearm glows softly when a message from your family arrives. You tap the skin to respond with a template, while embedded sensors send your sleep data to your doctor.
In Zuckerberg’s AR vision, you slip on glasses that instantly show your calendar hovering above the kettle. Navigation cues float outside your front door. Your phone may still exist, but you reach for it less often.
Cook’s version looks more incremental. Your iPhone remains the anchor, but AR features, health functions and AI assistants grow deeper each year. You might use a pair of Apple glasses at work or on flights, yet the phone stays the thing you grab before you leave the house.
Key terms behind this debate
Several ideas keep surfacing in this clash of visions:
- Brain–computer interface (BCI): hardware and software that lets the brain talk directly to machines, usually through electrical signals.
- Augmented reality (AR): digital images or data layered on top of the real world, often viewed through phones or glasses.
- Wearables: devices worn on the body, such as watches, rings, glasses or patches, that collect data or show information.
Each of these can exist with smartphones rather than against them. A BCI could control a phone. AR glasses can mirror what’s on your handset. Wearables already use phones as their brain.
Risks, benefits and what consumers might actually choose
The rivalry between these visions hides a practical question: how much change are people willing to accept for convenience?
Brain implants and electronic tattoos raise strong privacy and security concerns. If your thoughts or vital signs can be read, the stakes around hacking and data misuse grow dramatically. Regulators will likely move slowly, which could delay any mass‑market rollout.
AR glasses are less invasive, yet they bring social tensions: who is recording whom, how often people are distracted in public, and whether constant overlays make daily life feel cluttered.
Against that backdrop, a familiar device that keeps adding new tricks can feel like the safer compromise.
The benefits of these experimental paths are real. Faster communication, better medical monitoring and more natural digital interactions could improve lives. But the smartphone already delivers a large share of those gains, from emergency health alerts to language translation, without asking people to cross new psychological lines.
Africa splitting apart isn’t sudden, but one visible change is already happening beneath the surface
For the next decade at least, the most likely outcome is a messy overlap. Phones will keep expanding their role. Neural interfaces, smart tattoos and AR glasses will move from lab demo to niche product. And Tim Cook will keep arguing that the rectangular screen still has plenty of room to grow, even as his peers try to make it disappear.
