Smartphones to Outnumber All Other Personal Devices by 2030

Over the past five years, smartphones have quietly outpaced every other consumer technology product. Between 2020 and 2024, buyers worldwide picked up more than 9.3 billion handsets, and projections suggest another 8.5 billion will reach the market by 2030. That scale leaves laptops, tablets, and desktop PCs far behind.

Phones vs. Other Devices

By the end of the decade, consumers are expected to purchase close to 951 million tablets, around 441 million laptops, and just 65 million desktop computers. Put together, these totals still amount to barely a fraction of the smartphone market. On current trends, people will buy six times more smartphones than all three categories combined.

Spending Power

The money involved is just as striking. Global buyers have been spending between $420 billion and $470 billion a year on new handsets since 2020. Forecasts suggest that total will pass half a trillion dollars in 2026, before rising steadily to about $560 billion by 2029.

Shipment Growth

Behind the financial scale lies a slow but steady climb in annual shipments. Starting at 1.40 billion units in 2020, the market rose to 1.51 billion in 2021, 1.52 billion in 2022, and 1.59 billion in 2023. In 2024, sales reached 1.63 billion devices. Projections for the next few years point to incremental gains: 1.64 billion in 2025, 1.65 billion in 2026, and 1.67 billion in 2027. By 2030, shipments are expected to settle near 1.75 billion units a year.

Year	Shipments (billion units)
2020	1.40
2021	1.51
2022	1.52
2023	1.59
2024	1.63
2025	1.64
2026	1.65
2027	1.67
2028	1.69
2029	1.71
2030	1.75

Read next:

• AI Search Traffic Rises Fast, But Organic Still Converts

• How Many Days of Work It Takes to Buy an iPhone 17 Pro Worldwide: 2025 iPhone Affordability Index
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

AI Search Traffic Rises Fast, But Organic Still Converts

Artificial intelligence search platforms are growing quickly in 2025, yet their contribution to website traffic and sales remains minimal. Data from BrightEdge covering January through August shows AI referrals climbing at double-digit rates each month, but still representing less than one percent of total visits. Organic search continues to drive the largest share of traffic and delivers far stronger conversion results.

Sharp Swings in AI Platform Growth

Performance differs widely across providers. Anthropic’s Claude grew by 58 percent in July and 21 percent in August. xAI’s Grok spiked by 1,279 percent in July, then slowed to 17 percent the following month. ChatGPT has consistently led on referral volume in the past three months. DeepSeek, an early entrant from China, fell sharply through midsummer after early momentum.

How Users Approach Each Channel

The distinction lies in intent. People turning to AI tools are usually gathering background knowledge or exploring options. They remain in the research phase. Organic search users arrive with more specific goals, often linked to products or services, which puts them closer to a transaction. Many begin their journey with AI discovery but switch to organic or direct channels when making final decisions.

Dependence on Traditional Indexes

Even as AI platforms grow, their foundations remain tied to established search infrastructure. ChatGPT pulls results from Bing. Google’s AI tools rely on its own index. Claude draws from Brave. All deploy their own crawlers as well, which means standard SEO practices continue to influence visibility across both types of platforms.

External Sources Shaping AI Outputs

BrightEdge’s review shows AI systems drawing on a range of references beyond website content. News outlets, specialist media, forums, and social networks feed into the responses. For marketers, that underlines the value of building presence outside their own domains, from industry publications to community discussions, so information about their brand appears across the sources AI relies on.

Outlook for Marketers

AI search is creating new touchpoints at speed, but organic search remains the primary channel for digital growth. Businesses that maintain SEO fundamentals while preparing for AI-driven discovery are best positioned to capture audiences at both the research stage and the point of conversion.

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools. Image: DIW-Aigen.

Read next:

• One Phone, Two Realities: iPhone 17 Accessible Luxury for Some, Impossible Dream for Others

• Adaptability Over Knowledge: Google AI Chief Stresses Continuous Learning for Fast-Changing AI Era

by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

SEO in 2026: Content, AI, and Authority Drive the Year Ahead

A global study of 371 professionals from 52 countries, conducted by SearchEngineJournal shows how search teams are reshaping their work for the coming year. The report points to three clear themes: the weight placed on original content, the rise of AI tools, and the growing focus on authority signals.

Original Content Still Matters Most

Sixty-six percent of respondents said original content delivered the strongest impact in 2025. Content updates ranked next at 42.6 percent, with technical improvements close at 42.3 percent. More than four in ten professionals said creating original content takes the most time of any task.

To manage that workload, most teams plan to mix human writing with AI support. This hybrid model is now the majority approach, reflecting a desire to save time without losing quality.

Three Models of Practice

The survey shows three paths forming. About 22 percent use automation heavily, aiming for scale. Forty-nine percent focus on authority building, investing in expertise and credibility. A larger share, 58 percent, operate in the middle, using AI to help but keeping humans in control of final content.

Tools Shift Toward Integration

Analytics and reporting tools are still most common, used by 56 percent. Cross-functional platforms follow at 51.2 percent. AI writing assistants now sit at 42.3 percent, the same as technical SEO tools, confirming their place in standard workflows.

Concerns remain. Seventy-seven percent of professionals believe AI-generated answers in search could reduce website clicks. That figure makes it the top worry about the future of search visibility.

Authority Building as Defense

Nearly half of the respondents plan to increase investment in authority signals, often called E-E-A-T (experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness). Thirty-three percent also want to improve topical authority and site structure. These choices reflect an attempt to build assets AI cannot easily replace.

Main Challenges

Algorithm changes continue to disrupt work, with 59 percent calling them their biggest challenge. Workflow problems follow at 32 percent, and technical barriers affect 28 percent. In response, 42 percent of companies are training teams on AI use, while 36 percent are focusing on updated best practices. Collaboration across departments shows the lowest impact today at 9 percent, though 37 percent expect to increase it in 2026.

Budgets Remain Steady

Despite shifts in technology and search engines, investment in SEO remains stable. Only 43 percent cut spending last year. Looking ahead, 65 percent expect no reductions.

The confidence comes from results. Sixty percent of professionals reported growth in organic traffic. Another 34 percent saw more leads and conversions. Teams also said they are tracking outcomes that matter to the business. Organic traffic led at 74 percent, while qualified leads and sales followed at 60 percent.

Planning for 2026

The survey shows an industry adjusting rather than retreating. Professionals are leaning on AI for efficiency, reinforcing authority to protect long-term visibility, and continuing to secure budgets by tying outcomes to measurable business value. Whether through automation, human expertise, or hybrid workflows, SEO teams are preparing for another year of disruption while staying focused on proven results.

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools.

Read next: Adaptability Over Knowledge: Google AI Chief Stresses Continuous Learning for Fast-Changing AI Era
by Web Desk via Digital Information World

One Phone, Two Realities: iPhone 17 Accessible Luxury for Some, Impossible Dream for Others

Apple’s latest iPhone 17 has sparked global interest, not just for its features but for the gap in affordability between countries. While the device looks the same in every market, the number of working hours needed to purchase one shows a divide that reflects wages, taxes, and economic conditions.

Global Overview

In wealthier nations, the iPhone 17 Pro with 256 GB of storage can be bought with just a few days of income. Workers in Luxembourg, for example, need only around three working days, while those in the United States typically need just under four. By contrast, in India, the same phone requires the equivalent of 160 workdays, showing a difference of more than fifty times between the top and bottom of the ranking.

Across the 33 countries studied, the global average stands at about 26 workdays for the flagship model. This broad figure masks enormous contrasts: in some parts of Europe and North America, the phone amounts to a week’s work or less, while in South Asia or parts of Southeast Asia, several months of wages are needed.

Regional Contrasts

In North America, affordability is relatively high. The base model iPhone 17 costs about $799 in the United States before sales tax, and the Pro version starts at $1,099. With an average monthly wage near $6,000 and typical weekly hours of 37.6, American workers face about 30 hours of labor for the Pro model, or roughly four workdays.

Europe presents a mixed picture. In Switzerland, despite a price of about $1,381 for the Pro model, high average wages near $8,000 per month keep the work requirement low, at about 26 hours. In Germany, a similar phone costs around $1,110, requiring close to 32 workdays when adjusted for average income levels. Portugal and Hungary show a different reality: higher retail prices paired with lower wages push affordability far down the list, demanding more than a month of work for a single phone.

Brazil and Turkey highlight the impact of import duties, taxes, and currency fluctuations. In both countries, the base iPhone 17 surpasses $1,400, and the Pro version nears or exceeds $1,800. Average hourly wages of only about $4 mean that a Brazilian worker must spend between 409 and 461 hours to buy the base model and as much as 709 hours for the Pro Max version. In Turkey, the situation is even more extreme, with affordability further undermined by luxury taxes and a weak currency.

Asia’s Divide

In Asia, the affordability of the iPhone 17 varies sharply. Japan and South Korea are known for relatively low retail prices, yet wage levels shift the actual burden. A South Korean worker needs around 45 workdays to afford the Pro version, more than in several Western European countries. India and Vietnam reveal the most striking gaps. Although the nominal price has fallen in India due to local assembly and lower levies, the average hourly wage of just over a dollar leaves the device far out of reach. Workers there need about 160 days for the flagship model, while in Vietnam, with slightly higher wages, it still takes over 120 days.

Middle East and Africa

The Middle East shows a mixed affordability pattern. In Saudi Arabia, where average monthly wages approach $2,800 and working weeks average 40 hours, the iPhone 17 Pro costs roughly $1,400. This translates into about 100 hours of work, or nearly 13 working days. The United Arab Emirates, with somewhat higher wages and lower duties, requires about 11 days for the same device.

Africa reveals even harsher realities. In South Africa, the phone is listed at over $1,500. With average monthly earnings under $1,000 and weekly working hours above 40, it takes close to 60 days of labor for a worker to afford the flagship model. This makes the device more of a luxury good than a mainstream product in that region.

Latin America

Brazil and Mexico illustrate how the iPhone can represent very different economic weight within the same continent. As noted earlier, Brazil’s combination of high import costs and modest wages leads to the longest working hours in the Americas, up to 709 hours for a Pro Max. Mexico, where the iPhone Pro sells for about $1,350, requires around 52 days of average wages. Although more affordable than Brazil, it remains far beyond the U.S. benchmark.

Global Spread in Numbers

Looking at the complete dataset of 33 countries, the differences are stark.

• Top of the ranking: Luxembourg, Switzerland, and the United States, where workers need fewer than four days to afford the Pro model.
• Bottom of the ranking: India, Philippines, and Vietnam, requiring between 101 and 160 days.
• Global average: 26 days of work.

Workers in India must put in 51 times more hours than those in Luxembourg to afford the same device. Even within Europe, where Apple’s prices tend to be similar in nominal terms, wage differences make affordability diverge. Scandinavia and Western Europe sit close to the top, while Eastern and Southern Europe fall far lower.

Why Affordability Varies

Taxes, duties, logistics, and exchange rates all affect the final price of an iPhone. In Turkey, luxury taxes drive up the retail tag. In Brazil, import tariffs and transport security costs do the same. By contrast, local assembly in India has brought down nominal prices, although low wages keep affordability out of reach. In wealthier nations, the relationship between high incomes and relatively stable prices makes the device accessible in just a few days of work.

Final Insights

The affordability map of the iPhone 17 Pro shows how global income gaps translate directly into consumer access. For Apple, this means a divided customer base: in rich countries, the new iPhone remains a common upgrade, while in lower-income nations it is largely reserved for the wealthy.

The contrast also highlights broader inequality. A worker in Europe or North America can purchase the phone with little strain, whereas a counterpart in South Asia or parts of Latin America must dedicate months of wages. In the end, the iPhone 17 is not just a piece of technology but a mirror of global economic disparity, revealing who can participate in the premium smartphone market and who cannot.

Data H/T: Tenscope.

Country (Region)	Working days needed to buy the new iPhone	Average monthly wage (USD)	Weekly working hours (average)	Avg. monthly working hours	Average hourly wage (USD)	iPhone 17 Pro (256 GB) price (local currency)	iPhone 17 Pro (256 GB) price (USD)	Hours to buy the new iPhone
Luxembourg (Europe)	3	$9,228	35.6	154	$59.86	1,285	$1,506	25
Switzerland (Europe)	3	$8,000	35.2	152	$52.49	1,099	$1,381	26
United States (North America)	4	$5,985	37.6	163	$36.76	1,099	$1,099	30
Belgium (Europe)	4	$7,325	34.5	149	$49.03	1329	$1,559	32
Denmark (Europe)	4	$6,979	33.1	143	$48.69	9,999	$1,572	32
Netherlands (Europe)	4	$6,315	31.2	135	$46.74	1,329	$1,559	33
Norway (Europe)	4	$6,652	33.2	144	$46.27	15,990	$1,619	35
Australia (Oceania)	5	$5,091	32.3	140	$36.40	1999	$1,327	36
Austria (Europe)	5	$5,771	34	147	$39.20	1,299	$1,524	39
Finland (Europe)	5	$5,784	34.3	149	$38.94	1,359	$1,595	41
Ireland (Europe)	5	$5,640	34.8	151	$37.43	1,339	$1,569	42
Germany (Europe)	5	$5,170	33.6	145	$35.54	1,299	$1,522	43
Canada (North America)	5	$4,072	35.2	152	$26.71	1,599	$1,154	43
France (Europe)	6	$5,043	35.8	155	$32.54	1,329	$1,555	48
Sweden (Europe)	6	$4,739	35.1	152	$31.18	14,995	$1,609	52
United Kingdom (Europe)	7	$4,119	35.1	152	$27.10	1,099	$1,477	55
New Zealand (Oceania)	7	$3,564	33	143	$24.94	2,349	$1,400	56
Singapore (South East Asia)	8	$4,050	42.6	184	$21.96	1,749	$1,363	62
Italy (Europe)	8	$3,908	36.1	156	$25.00	1,339	$1,564	63
United Arab Emirates (Middle East)	8	$4,083	48.7	211	$19.36	4,699	$1,279	66
Spain (Europe)	9	$3,567	36.6	158	$22.51	1,319	$1,547	69
Czechia (Europe)	12	$2,788	37.8	164	$17.03	32,990	$1,587	93
Poland (Europe)	17	$1,973	39.1	169	$11.65	5,799	$1,599	137
Portugal (Europe)	24	$1,374	37.7	163	$8.42	1,349	$1,582	188
Hungary (Europe)	27	$1,224	37.4	162	$7.56	549,990	$1,647	218
Chile (Latin America)	32	$1,015	39.4	171	$5.95	1,429,990	$1,501	252
Malaysia (South East Asia)	45	$697	44.7	194	$3.60	5,499	$1,303	362
Thailand (South East Asia)	61	$525	42.5	184	$2.85	43,900	$1,381	485
Brazil (Latin America)	77	$585	38.9	168	$3.47	11,499	$2,133	615
Türkiye (Middle East)	89	$682	42.8	185	$3.68	107,999	$2,611	709
Vietnam (South East Asia)	99	$303	41.8	181	$1.67	34,999,000	$1,325	791
Philippines (South East Asia)	101	$308	40	173	$1.78	79,990	$1,437	808
India (South Asia)	160	$236	45.7	198	$1.19	134,900	$1,525	1,280

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools.

Read next: Adaptability Over Knowledge: Google AI Chief Stresses Continuous Learning for Fast-Changing AI Era

by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Adaptability Over Knowledge: Google AI Chief Stresses Continuous Learning for Fast-Changing AI Era

At an open-air summit in Athens, Demis Hassabis, head of Google’s DeepMind and Nobel chemistry laureate, argued that the skill most needed in the years ahead will be the ability to keep learning. He described education as moving into a period where adaptability matters more than fixed knowledge, because the speed of artificial intelligence research is shortening the lifespan of expertise.

Hassabis said future workers will have to treat learning as a constant process, not a stage that ends with graduation. He pointed to rapid advances in computing and biology as examples of how quickly fields now change once AI tools enter the picture.

Outlook on technology

The DeepMind chief warned that artificial general intelligence may not be far away. In his view, it could emerge within a decade, carrying a weight of opportunity and risk. He described its potential impact as larger and faster than the industrial revolution, a shift that could deliver breakthroughs in medicine, clean energy, and space exploration.

Even so, he stressed that powerful models must be tested carefully before being widely deployed. The practice of pushing products out quickly, common in earlier technology waves, should not guide the release of systems capable of influencing economies and societies on a global scale.

Prime minister’s caution

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, who shared the stage at the Odeon of Herodes Atticus, said governments will struggle to keep pace with corporate growth unless they adopt a more active role. He warned that when the benefits of technology are concentrated among a small set of companies, public confidence erodes. He tied the issue to social stability, saying communities won’t support AI unless they see its value in everyday life.

Mitsotakis pointed to Greece’s efforts to build an “AI factory” around a new supercomputer in Lavrio. He presented the project as part of a wider European push to turn regulation and research into competitive advantages, while reducing reliance on U.S. and Chinese platforms.

Education and jobs

Both speakers returned repeatedly to the theme of skills. Hassabis said that in addition to traditional training in science and mathematics, students should learn how to monitor their own progress and adjust their methods. He argued that the most valuable opportunities often appear where two fields overlap, and that AI can serve as a tutor to help learners explore those connections.

Mitsotakis said the challenge for governments is to match school systems with shifting labor markets. He noted that Greece is mainly a service economy, which may delay some of the disruption already visible in manufacturing-heavy nations. But he cautioned that job losses are unavoidable, including in sectors long thought resistant to automation.

Strains on democracy

The prime minister voiced concern that misinformation powered by AI could undermine elections. He mentioned deepfakes as a direct threat to public trust and said Europe may need stricter rules on content distribution. He also highlighted risks to mental health among teenagers exposed to endless scrolling and algorithm-driven feeds.

Hassabis agreed that lessons from social media should inform current choices. He suggested AI might help by filtering information in ways that broaden debate instead of narrowing it. He described a future where personal assistants act in the interest of individual users, steering them toward content that supports healthier dialogue.

The question of abundance

Discussion also touched on the idea that AI could usher in an era of radical abundance. Hassabis said research in protein science, energy, and material design already shows how quickly knowledge is expanding. He argued that the technology could open access to vast resources, but he added that how wealth is shared will depend on governments and economic policy, not algorithms.

Mitsotakis drew parallels with earlier industrial shifts, warning that if productivity gains are captured only by large firms, pension systems and social programs will face heavy strain. He said policymakers must prepare for a period of disruption that could arrive faster than many expect.

Greece’s role

The Athens event also highlighted the country’s ambition to build a regional hub for technology. Mitsotakis praised the growth of local startups and said incentives, venture capital, and government adoption of AI in public services would be central to maintaining momentum.

Hassabis, whose family has roots in Cyprus, said Europe needs to remain at the frontier of AI research if it wants influence in setting ethical and technical standards. He called Greece’s combination of history and new infrastructure a symbolic setting for conversations on the future of technology.

Preparing for the next era

The dialogue closed on a shared message: societies will need citizens who can adapt and learn throughout their lives. For Hassabis, this adaptability is the foundation for navigating a future shaped by artificial intelligence. For Mitsotakis, the task is making sure those changes strengthen democratic values rather than weaken them.

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools.

Read next: Most Americans Now Rely on AI in Search and Shopping, Survey Finds
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Google Accused of Exploiting Publisher Content for AI

At an industry conference this week, People Inc. chief executive Neil Vogel said Google is harming publishers by drawing on their content to fuel artificial intelligence features. He explained that Google once drove around 65 percent of traffic to his company’s sites, but that figure has now fallen to less than 30 percent. People Inc., which owns People, Food & Wine, and other well-known titles, still relies on Google for part of its audience, yet the decline highlights a shift in how information is consumed online.

AI crawlers and blocked access

Vogel argued that other AI firms can be blocked from scanning websites, forcing them to negotiate content deals. Google is different. Its single crawler collects data for both search and AI. Blocking it would also remove a publisher’s presence from search results, cutting off remaining referral traffic. That structure, according to Vogel, prevents publishers from having meaningful leverage.

Industry responses

Some media companies have started using Cloudflare technology to stop non-paying AI systems from accessing their material. Vogel said this tactic has brought large language model providers to the table, though no final agreements are in place. Cloudflare’s chief executive noted that referral traffic is already shrinking because AI-generated snippets answer user questions directly, leaving fewer reasons to click through to the original sources.

Legal disputes and past examples

The tension is mirrored in court cases. The New York Times is pursuing OpenAI over claims of unauthorized training on its work. Anthropic recently reached a $1.5 billion settlement with book publishers. Analysts see these developments as signs that licensing deals may become standard. Observers also point to YouTube’s history, where lawsuits over piracy led to a revenue-sharing model that now supports creators worldwide.

What lies ahead

Critics believe Google’s position makes it harder for publishers to survive in the long term. Research shows that major outlets have lost more than half their search traffic in recent years. Executives warn that this could accelerate if Google integrates AI responses more deeply into search. Some call this scenario “search engine zero,” a point where Google provides almost no traffic to external sites while retaining user attention within its own ecosystem.

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools. Image: DIW-Aigen.

Read next:

• AI Moderation Systems Clash on What Counts as Hate Speech

• Survey Shows Trust in Influencers Falling, With Sharp Gaps Between Generations

by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Survey Shows Trust in Influencers Falling, With Sharp Gaps Between Generations

New data suggests consumers are losing confidence in social media influencers, with generational divides shaping how online endorsements are received. The survey, conducted in June 2025 with 277 U.S. adults, shows that trust in influencers is uneven and often tied to age and platform habits.

Generational Patterns

Gen Z stood out as the group most likely to believe influencer recommendations, with 55 percent saying they trust such content. Millennials followed at 44 percent, while Gen X recorded 35 percent. Baby Boomers showed the lowest trust at 28 percent. The gap means younger adults are almost twice as likely as older groups to take influencer advice seriously.

These numbers reflect broader media habits. Gen Z, raised in an environment shaped by YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, often sees influencers as part of everyday peer circles. Boomers and many in Gen X, by contrast, still rely more on television, newspapers, or word-of-mouth reviews. For them, social media posts often look like paid promotions rather than genuine product use.

Decline in Purchases From Recommendations

The survey, conducted by Clutch, also confirms a shift in behavior. Nearly half of respondents said they had not bought any product endorsed by influencers in the last twelve months. Two years earlier, a majority had acted on such promotions. This decline shows how consumer expectations have changed.

Oversaturation of sponsored content is one likely factor. Users are regularly exposed to promotional posts, which can create fatigue. Another factor is transparency. Paid partnerships raise doubts, and 53 percent of respondents said knowing an influencer was paid makes them less likely to trust the endorsement. Yet, at the same time, 87 percent still believe influencers have used the products they recommend. The tension suggests that trust depends more on perceived intent than on product knowledge.

Platforms and Reach

Influencer activity is most visible on visual platforms. About 61 percent of respondents said they most often encounter recommendations on YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, or Pinterest. YouTube remains the most trusted for detailed reviews and demonstrations, while TikTok is influential among younger users seeking quick and entertaining clips. Instagram continues to drive lifestyle branding, and Pinterest holds its place for inspiration-driven categories like fashion, home, and DIY.

Divided Views on Credibility

The survey shows no consensus on whether influencers are more reliable than brands. Forty-one percent of respondents said they were unsure, a result that highlights the difficulty of establishing trust in today’s digital marketplace. Many consumers remain undecided, questioning whether endorsements from individuals or companies carry more weight.

A notable trend is the rise of micro-influencers. About 20 percent of respondents said they prefer recommendations from accounts with follower counts between 10,000 and 100,000. These smaller voices are often considered more approachable and relatable than large celebrity-style figures with millions of followers.

Implications for Brands

The findings reflect an evolving landscape. Highly polished influencer campaigns that once drew quick attention no longer guarantee results. Younger audiences still see influencers as part of their decision-making process, but older groups are less responsive and often skeptical of commercial motives.

For brands, the message is clear. Long-term partnerships with influencers, combined with transparent communication, are more likely to build credibility than one-off sponsored posts. Choosing the right platforms and understanding generational preferences has become central to strategy.

Trust remains fragile. It can decline quickly when audiences sense inauthenticity, but it can also be reinforced when influencers and brands deliver consistent, honest engagement. As influencer marketing matures, credibility rather than reach may determine which campaigns succeed.

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools.

Read next: AI Moderation Systems Clash on What Counts as Hate Speech

by Asim BN via Digital Information World