Recommended Posts

NEW YORK (AP) ? Don't try to friend MaLi Arwood on Facebook. You won't find her there.

You won't find Thomas Chin, either. Or Kariann Goldschmitt. Or Jake Edelstein.

More than 900 million people worldwide check their Facebook accounts at least once a month, but millions more are Facebook holdouts.

They say they don't want Facebook. They insist they don't need Facebook. They say they're living life just fine without the long-forgotten acquaintances that the world's largest social network sometimes resurrects.

They are the resisters.

"I'm absolutely in touch with everyone in my life that I want to be in touch with," Arwood says. "I don't need to share triviality with someone that I might have known for six months 12 years ago."

Even without people like Arwood, Facebook is one of the biggest business success stories in history. The site had 1 million users by the end of 2004, the year Mark Zuckerberg started it in his Harvard dorm room. Two years later, it had 12 million. Facebook had 500 million by summer 2010 and 901 million as of March 31, according to the company.

But if Facebook is to live up to its pre-IPO hype and reward the investors who are clamoring for its stock this week, it needs to convince some of the resisters to join. Two out of every five American adults have not joined Facebook, according to a recent Associated Press-CNBC poll. Among those who are not on Facebook, a third cited a lack of interest or need.

If all those people continue to shun Facebook, the social network could become akin to a postal system that only delivers mail to houses on one side of the street. The system isn't as useful, and people aren't apt to spend as much time with it. That means fewer opportunities for Facebook to sell ads.

more

I don't have a face book and I hate it. You want to get ahold of me? Text me, email me, call me, drop by sometime. I rearely ever even check my twitter. I have better things to do than shareing my life with the world and friends I haven't seen in 10+ years.

Sadly had Facebook since it was University only and still using it today, Attempted to switch over to G+ but not enough of my friends/family use it to justify the switch.

It's safe to say that at some point in time Facebook will lose it's shine and will become an also ran like it's forebears. I am one of those that has a Facebook account that is rarely used and most of the people who are listed as friends I've not seen in 20 years and probably will not see in the next 20 years! I would have to go with the reasons behind the "resisters" not being interested in the concept!

I liked Facebook originally but as they've tried to make more money it's lost it's way with needless advertising in feed, such as trending articles. I'm also starting to become wary of their practices. I didn't mind when they used to automatically use info to target adverts [no human interaction], much like MySpace before it, but now I'm starting to become wary of their practices.

The golden rule still is to watch what you post though.

Edit: It's also getting too engrained in our lives. It needs to keep it's distance.

I am a facebook holdout, I never plan on getting a facebook account, do not see the point in it, check out my poll on this subject, and see that 101 people voted, and 65% voted yes they have a account and use it.

  • Like 2

I don't have a facebook account. I've never had one, I don't intend to get one. I've never seen the attraction. I didn't have a bebo or myspace account either. In the end these kind of services always seem to disappear eventually. A few people I know have deleted their accounts recently, seems to be the latest hipster thing to do, delete your facebook and start using a rotary phone xD

I don't have a facebook account. I've never had one, I don't intend to get one. I've never seen the attraction. I didn't have a bebo or myspace account either. In the end these kind of services always seem to disappear eventually. A few people I know have deleted their accounts recently, seems to be the latest hipster thing to do, delete your facebook and start using a rottery phone xD

Rotary cell phone to be percise... Apple is working on it now with the old clickwheel on their next screenless iPhone rotary edition

If even if you don't want to "share triviality" there is one advantage that always seems to get glossed over.

Lots of websites are now using Facebook to manage their login / registration - not only is this a quick way to sign up to the latest / must have service but it's also easier to only remember one username password and know that when you change the password it's changed for everything.

If you don't want to post anything on Facebook then don't (or don't let anyone have permission to view your wall / timeline).

I really don't care whether someone likes or doesn't like Facebook. Let those that use it keep on using it and let those that don't want to use it do so as well.

Essentially these threads just regurgitate the same "I don't like, I do like" -blah blah where everything has been said a thousand times before. It's like taking care of the demented, every day the same speech gets repeated like a robot.

I really don't care whether someone likes or doesn't like Facebook. Let those that use it keep on using it and let those that don't want to use it do so as well.

Essentially these threads just regurgitate the same "I don't like, I do like" -blah blah where everything has been said a thousand times before. It's like taking care of the demented, every day the same speech gets repeated like a robot.

Exactly the way I feel about it--and with most things, really. There are lots of products out there, everybody has different wants and needs... the fact that you do or do not happen to use a particular website/phone/computer/whatever doesn't make you cooler or not cooler than anyone else. (I'm looking at you, rabid fanboys.)

I have a funny take on facebook detractors. The more I speak to people who don't/refuse use FB, the more I'm beginning to question their reasons why. Moreso now because it seems like people are just categorically dismissing FB for what they think it is rather than what it actually is.

Facebook is what you make it. The social network that you are a part in is dependent on how much you put into it. If you don't want to catch up with people from 20 years ago, don't. Since the last revamping the group structure, I would argue that it's actually a lot easier to manage the flow of communication, both incoming and outgoing, than it ever has been. For those who mention their problems with ads, they aren't intrusive on the mobile side of the house (yet), they aren't a part of your feeds (again, yet) and any decent ad blocking plug in will take care of the ones that do show up. FB is now taking steps for future ad policy and putting the decision in your hands. See here:

581234084.jpg?key=767260&Expires=1337265998&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIYVGSUJFNRFZBBTA&Signature=HQlKeuoRvk-gBlg1~OxyecdfK4ysaXl2JKBwiTFsCXBXAThjbp08aUsHOiR0SHiKUN7rGk9cWHdWN98AmXJXd04sEprHHy6i~uIHqOls14YkZ~ZouKekGzyZH3XMIoDYjagxxZJTAJYkQOxTiGuhFsvzeRTZjPR4M7hIabpUIBs_

(Sidenote: For those of you who would say that you shouldn't have to use an ad blocking program, yet are concerned about ads on facebook have a choice to do so. If you single out facebook for their ads, but are willing to deal with another site's ads, I won't address that address that hypocrisy. You are obviously confortable with that. The same ads companies will buy ad space on your favorite website anyway. Just carry on.)

There's absolutely no need to have a Facebook account if you don't care about gossip or exposing your life.

Fact.

You can use Facebook without exposing anything.

I sync Facebook events with the Google calendar, and then show all events from my Google calendar on my desktop calendar. That way I can easily keep track of birthdays, planned trips and activities, live shows or whatever my contacts organize.

Then again all my contacts are people I know in real life, most of them close friends and/or people from the drop zone.

agree, and they have been going on for years.

I think alot of these people use facebook (you kinda do anymore if you wanna stay in touch with friends and family), but say they dont just to be sayin they dont.

There's no nice "stay in touch with your family". Facebook is separating people, creating unnecessary envy, making people lazy to pay real visits and promoting gossip.

This is a bad "tool" and should be discussed. The ones who use it have their reasons and the ones who don't either, so why not discuss them?

Facebook is making people more competitive and unhappy. The ones who like it are always trying to excuse themselves for swimming in the sh**.

I have a funny take on facebook detractors. The more I speak to people who don't/refuse use FB, the more I'm beginning to question their reasons why. Moreso now because it seems like people are just categorically dismissing FB for what they think it is rather than what it actually is.

Facebook is what you make it. The social network that you are a part in is dependent on how much you put into it. If you don't want to catch up with people from 20 years ago, don't. Since the last revamping the group structure, I would argue that it's actually a lot easier to manage the flow of communication, both incoming and outgoing, than it ever has been. For those who mention their problems with ads, they aren't intrusive on the mobile side of the house (yet), they aren't a part of your feeds (again, yet) and any decent ad blocking plug in will take care of the ones that do show up. FB is now taking steps for future ad policy and putting the decision in your hands. See here:

581234084.jpg?key=767260&Expires=1337265998&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIYVGSUJFNRFZBBTA&Signature=HQlKeuoRvk-gBlg1~OxyecdfK4ysaXl2JKBwiTFsCXBXAThjbp08aUsHOiR0SHiKUN7rGk9cWHdWN98AmXJXd04sEprHHy6i~uIHqOls14YkZ~ZouKekGzyZH3XMIoDYjagxxZJTAJYkQOxTiGuhFsvzeRTZjPR4M7hIabpUIBs_

(Sidenote: For those of you who would say that you shouldn't have to use an ad blocking program, yet are concerned about ads on facebook have a choice to do so. If you single out facebook for their ads, but are willing to deal with another site's ads, I won't address that address that hypocrisy. You are obviously confortable with that. The same ads companies will buy ad space on your favorite website anyway. Just carry on.)

The difference is that in real life you don't have to select people from 20 years ago in a webpage that looks like a serving of people's faces in a serialized menu.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!