I think that's perfectly valid thinking. In a way, it's purely a matter of semantics. Most would probably agree that "SHTF" ranks somewhere between "disaster" and "mega disaster". Not sure though if that classification (albeit more politically correct) makes interpreting the severity of the situation any easier or more objective per se.

At the end of the day, it's the eye of the beholder. I'm sure that for a good number of people these days accidentally dunking their smartphone in the toilet would constitute a "giga disaster". I'm not sure though how those same individuals would rate something potentially more dangerous still, like a major natural disaster or civil war.

And that's not even getting into TEOTWAWKI fantasy territory. It's not survivalist fiction, "virtual reality" stuff like scavenging for ammo, taking guns off dead bad guys, saving the human race from extinction with the treasure of knowledge stored for posterity on your SD card etc.

9/11, Katrina, the Nepal earthquake, Syria - just a few familiar examples. Some of that stuff is actually happening as we speak. Just not to us (enjoying a quiet online discussion on our PCs, smartphones and WiFi gadgets) at this particular moment, but to real people somewhere far away.

But it could happen to anyone. So can one ever truly prepare oneself for a "mega disaster" (I think I'd actually prefer the term "SHTF" within that particular context)? Probably not, and in general you're absolutely right that it makes more sense in our given situation to focus primarily on minor emergencies that are easier to prepare for and more likely to happen.

As far as the tools best suited to dealing with a particular scale of disaster... I suspect it's a matter of force continuum more or less. The bigger the problem, the harder the solution. By the same token, if your problem can be solved with a smartphone app... It's probably not actual SHTF/TEOTWAWKI/end of days mega disaster.