A major audiophile won't be happy with a phone. Someone big into 'caching' isn't using Google or Apple maps. A home theatre -phile won't want to watch something good on a phone.
> …that software does amazing things with old camera hardware .
A “better camera” supported by worse software is not what the poster seems to want.
Are you going to carry around your camera with you everywhere?
And as far as audiophiles, it’s been repeatedly shown in blind studies that they can’t tell the difference as often as their snobbery would suggest.
But I made good commissions in college selling overpriced Monster cables to them.
I'm not going to carry it everywhere no, nor did I say that. (Actually I didn't even say it applied to me.) I carry my Panasonic TZ100 when on holiday or otherwise desirous of better-than-phone photos. It fits in my pocket. Not the same one as my phone granted, but nonetheless in a pocket while in a case and straddling a spare battery.
There are audiophiles and audiophiles. A good chunk of them will laugh at Monster cables et al. as much as any of us.
You can appreciate a better DAC than found in most/all phones without descending into gold-plated USB-C charging cables that maintain optimal audio nonsense.
And even that assuming playback of some locally stored file. I'm not sure any of the mainstream streaming Services offer a format/bitrate that it's not possible objectively to do better than.