Kay compares the iPhone, et al to "selling sugar water to children" in an attempt to relegate them to "consumer gadget" status... compared to what, enterprise gadgets?
No, compared to the early vision (1950s/60s) of computers as metatools that humans can use to augment their cognition. The current crop of mobile devices (and even most desktop devices) are nowhere nearer to that glorious goal. See his OOPSLA talk "The computer revolution hasn't happened yet" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKg1hTOQXoY
That's a bit harsh. The iPhone and its ilk have clearly done both: revolutionise information and connectivity, as you say, AND introduced entire generations to rampant consumerism.
Whether or not one outweighs the other, or whether the latter is all that bad, is a different discussion. But just because you have a different perspective than he does is no reason to attack him for it.
He sounds like a grumpy old man mixed with a bit of hipster. If you can dismiss the mobile revolution as selling "sugar water to children" you're wearing blindfolds. Look at adoption rates of these devices all around the world - it's unmatched in human history. Look how they've given access to healthcare and finance in poor countries.
He didn't dismiss the mobile revolution, he dismissed consumer Apple products. Not quite the same thing, unless you think the impoverished masses were uplifted by itunes.
