DSLR vs. iPhone is apples and oranges. Two devices with completely different use cases.
If your primary goal is to buy a no-compromise device for photography, obviously you should get a full size camera.
But 99% of the time, you're going to have an iPhone in your pocket and no camera on hand. That's why it's great to have an excellent camera in your phone. You can always augment with a DSLR for special occasions, but it's not like a DSLR and iPhone are interchangeable.
I can only talk to Panasonic (GX8) and Fujifilm (X100F, XE3), but for both of those it's still pretty awful. Transfers are very slow, especially if you want full resolution, and it's always frustrating to just connect my phone to the camera--the apps are slow and clunky, setting up the adhoc network is flaky, and often times even after connecting it'll suddenly just disconnect for no reason. The XE3 supposedly supports a persistent, bluetooth connection that'll auto connect and auto transfer photos, but every time I've tried to set that up, it sends like the first two photos along and then doesn't work anymore.
I've moved to just using an SD card reader.
I don't have kids, but wouldn't Live Photos be a better feature for reliving moments with your kids? A DSLR will never be able to do that, because the mechanical shutter prevents it from doing so.
For the amount of time it takes - the iPhone 12 Pro and similar can really outperform a camera. One you get a snapshot you'd be okay with sharing with others immediately - with the other, you're like, "Yeah, the exposure is a little off but maybe that's just because of the dynamic range limitations? And I need to adjust the contrast, maybe sharpen a little bit, colors aren't really there, and it would've been great if I had done bracketed exposures because the sky is just too blown out to recover properly..." A lot of that stuff is gone with smartphones because they do it all for you.
It's what annoys me about modern cameras - they don't have any of that built in as an option. You have to do all the work by yourself and bracketing is just way too much of a PITA for me to deal with for most photos. Computational photography is a huge breakthrough that many cameras just don't utilize almost at all.
It's not the camera that makes the difference but the lens. And a smartphone just can't make up that difference with software tricks.
A smartphone will be fantastically practical and convenient as a camera in a specific set of use-cases. Outside those it's pretty useless.
That's why I think smartphones are great. They lower the barrier for taking pretty good pictures. You don't have to worry about balancing exposure or figuring out how to merge multiple photos into one - etc. The smartphone does it all for you. It's an automated photo editor with some intelligent tricks that are very hard (or impossible) to do on a traditional camera.
No one is saying a smartphone is going to replace a pro-camera. If you want to do birding with a 1200mm equivalent, you're going to have a hard time doing that with a smartphone. But if you know the limitations (in the same way that all cameras have limitations) then it can do really well in those parameters.. and I find those parameters are more than enough for 90%+ of consumers out there.
Most people are fine with zooming with their feet.
Sony and Samsung have already started using much beefier hardware, now that their custom Asic is falling behind.
Looks like EyeFi (WiFi-equipped SD cards) isn't a thing anymore: http://www.eyefi.com/ "Welcome to nginx!"