San Francisco To Stop Buying Apple Computers 392
New submitter djnanite writes "Following on from the story that Apple has exited the 'Green Hardware' certification program, the BBC reports that City officials in San Francisco plan to block local government agencies from buying new Apple's Macintosh computers. Will they be the first of many, or will cheaper products override people's conscience? 'Other CIOs in government and educational institutions, where Apple has a strong presence, could find themselves asked to drop MacBooks and iMacs. The federal government, for example, requires 95% of its laptops and desktops be EPEAT-certified.' Apple defended the move by saying their products are environmentally superior in areas not measured by EPEAT."
Hmm (Score:5, Funny)
The beginning of the end for Apple
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Insightful)
The beginning of the end for Apple
If they start pissing off arrogant, self-important hippies and douchebags, there goes their core market. By the way:
Other CIOs in government and educational institutions, where Apple has a strong presence, could find themselves asked to drop MacBooks and iMacs.
Except ones that are already made are EPEAT certified so that would make no logical sense. But hey, take them away anyway and let them use a real computer. Macs are WAY the hell too expensive to be used by the government. I've heard of California's government waste and excessive spending but Apple products in the government is a new low for them.
Re: (Score:3)
If they start pissing off arrogant, self-important hippies and douchebags, there goes their core market
Lack of a 'green' certification isn't going to push these people away. A thug in glasses and a black turtleneck could come to their crashpad and punch them in the face every day and they'd still crawl back for their iFix. Looking cool using a device with a nifty UI trumps anything else. You really think they're all going to stary buying Vaios?
Re: (Score:3)
Apple withdrew ALL their computers from EPEAT. Even the certified ones, and even the ones that are still certified AFTER the new rules (e.g., Mac Mini, non-Retina Macbook Pros, iMac, Mac Pro...).
It's not a case of "the computers are no longer EPEAT certifiable", it's more of "Apple feels EPEAT is no longer in their interests" and withdrew all computers fro mthe lineup. I'ts not like individual computers weren't making c
Re: (Score:3)
Apple withdrew ALL their computers from EPEAT. Even the certified ones, and even the ones that are still certified AFTER the new rules (e.g., Mac Mini, non-Retina Macbook Pros, iMac, Mac Pro...). It's not a case of "the computers are no longer EPEAT certifiable", it's more of "Apple feels EPEAT is no longer in their interests" and withdrew all computers fro mthe lineup.
EPEAT's rules conflicted with Apple's planned obsolescence strategy. No doubt, Apple views itself as so important that EPEAT would change its rules in order to get them back. It's hard to see how anybody could be that stupid.
As for repairability - I'm not so sure if it's a big a "green" thing as it's made out to be. After all, I don't see on iFixit that they provide recycling services (with return shipping) for the used parts you replace...
What you're overlooking here is the issue of recycling the entire device just because the battery died, after all, out of warranty "battery repair" is likely to cost nearly the same as a new device, so what iGroupie would not prefer the latter option? You also doubt that the battery cou
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
eah, it's definitely the best commercial desktop OS...oh except basically no corporate software runs of them, they're ungodly expensive, you'll never ever assemble an IT department that specializes in macs, there's no common management whatsoever, and all your employees are used to Windows. Other than all that, it's the best! Get fucking real. I am so sick of you clueless apple fanboys posting bullshit like this.
i work for a company of almost 10k people. everyone has a mac. it's fully supported by IT. it can access all enterprise resources. i'm sure there are windows boxes around, but i've been here 2 months, and i've never seen one. yes, we have to run mcafee security malware on them, but oh well. we don't use exchange here, but i have had exchange for osx at other companies, and it's quite nice.
macs aren't expensive when you realize what companies pay for fully supported windows computers from the likes of dell a
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Informative)
The latter actually has practical application!
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Funny)
The current CEO may have been running things, but you can bet your ass he was taking input from Jobs when he was around.
Are you referring to the rumours that Steve Jobs was gay?
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Suing everybody for everything is very much a Jobs initiative. In his biography, he infamously pledged to spend Apple's entire fortune to "destroy" Android for "stealing" "his" ideas.
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Suing everybody for everything is very much a Jobs initiative. In his biography, he infamously pledged to spend Apple's entire fortune to "destroy" Android for "stealing" "his" ideas.
Hey, he rightfully stole them from the Prada phone who rightfully stole them from Palm who stole them from Xerox! I mean, stealing something at a fourth degree really is original!
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Can you be a bit more specific about the stupid moves they started doing after Jobs? They were already suing everyone when Jobs was there, so that doesn't count.
More than that, Jobs wasn't a designer, wasn't a serious programmer, wasn't a serious engineer, wasn't any of the things that went into making products that were as successful as Apple's have been. The guy was deeply involved at every level, yes, but to say the company was 100% Jobs is just stupid and it completely dismisses the accomplishments of some extremely talented people.
What indication do you have that Cook is the way you say? The "environmental" move is only going to hurt them with institutional buyers who have vendor requirements, but the vast majority of Apple's revenue comes from individuals, and given that when Apple was routinely being accused of engaging in basically slavery in order to make products in China they still sold record numbers of everything, it's pretty clear to me that individual consumers aren't going to stop just because Apple might not bother with certain certifications.
I'm open to real examples, but just your saying "they suck now" isn't sufficient support to make that argument.
To me, the beginning of the end (or of the end of this phase of Apple) would be if they went back to the old ways of less than attractive design, way too many different models with confusing and dumb options.
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll grant you that, yes, Jobs had a penchant for telling the board to fuck off. And you know what? They all made a shitload more money for it.
When the last generation of MBPs hit the market, I was interested; had I not just bought a new laptop right before they came out, I'd probably have a 17" MBP right now. Their current lineup? No, thank you; the most compelling thing in that lineup is the current Air; it *should* be the RMBP, but they went and fucked that one up with too much solder and glue. I'm in the market for a laptop again and just got a raise that increases my monthly salary by about the cost of a base model RMBP, but have no interest in their current offerings. Maybe they still have some of last-gen's 17-inchers around? And Lion? Lion is a freakin' joke, next to Snow Leopard; it'll be a sad day when the security patches for Snow stop roling in.
All Apple is doing right now is taking steps to pump their stock as high as possible so the execs can take the money and run, leaving a pile of rubble behind.
I'll admit I was never a huge fan of Apple, even before OSX and iCrap (i'll never like the iPod in its current incarnation, or the iPad as long as it's as locked down as it is -- the iPod Clasic and Nano are alright, I guess), mostly due to their marketing, which is often times misleading, at best. But, working on a Mac 40+hr/wk for the last two and a half years has changed my perspective, at least, of their technical offering. I still don't think the hardware is worth the price (I haven't seen any of this superior engineering or better quality that I keep hearing about, I've seen as many Mac hardware problems as I've seen PC hardware problems, and I've seen far fewer Macs) but the OS, at least Snow Leopard, does have its good bits and there's a bit of decent software that's OSX-only. I started coming around, to the point that, despite the mediocre quiality I've observed their hardware to be, despite the pricetag, because I have come to like the platform, I had placed Apply at the top of my "buy" list. Then, with Lion, the dropped down a slot, and, with their current hardware lineup, they now find themselves near the bottom, about to once again be removed from the list.
Pity. They were doing so well for so long.
Hell, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the execs do have a long term plan. Maybe they just want to get out of the desktop market? Let me posit, for a momint, that this is the case. If they simply announce that they're exiting a market that is currently growing and profitable, their shareholders will eat them alive. However, if they make that product line unprofitable, shareholders will begin to demand that they drop it. Think about it, the next version of iOS won't need a computer *AT ALL*. That's the last piece of the puzzle, once that's in place, Apple won't need to sell computers to support the iCrap line; since that's where the money is, why would they want to support a desktop OS, too?
I really do hope Apple rights their ship, though. I've come to like this platform and it would be sad to watch it disappear.
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Funny)
Oh before that. In 92-93 in college I had to deal with other idiot students saying stuff like "The Mac is not a computer" and how it was junk from the past. It's been dying for 20 years now.
Except that's the point. It WAS dying in 92-93. That's why they brought Jobs back in 96 after ousting him 11 years earlier. That same Hail Mary isn't going to work this time. (Who wants their computer, no matter how stylish, to keep trying to eat their brains at night?)
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many who hate the idea of form over function, and people also hate people claiming that they invented something that was already around before they made their claim. Apple only takes ideas that others have come up with and then put them in a pretty package, but that does not mean they invented the idea. This is why Apple needs to be taken down a few pegs as far as the public perception, because they are NOT being terribly innovative. Being the first to jump on a new technology that another company has invented also does not make them innovative.
True innovation tends to come from those who actually develop new technologies, including but not limited to Intel, AMD, Microsoft, and many others. Notice that MacOS is still on version 10, and no small addition of features over the years will change that, iOS has not really changed much in terms of the UI, and any CHANGE has been fairly minor. Yea, innovation, it means trying something new, and it doesn't always pan out. Stagnation is when people or companies are stuck doing things the same way because people are afraid of change.
Ohhh shiny (Score:5, Funny)
Apple defended the move by saying their products are environmentally superior in areas not measured by EPEAT."
They must mean those superior shiny rounded rectangular areas.
Re:Ohhh shiny (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ohhh shiny (Score:5, Informative)
Problem with most of the Certification Agencies, is that by giving particular rules to make things certified, is that people know the rules, follow them to get the certification, however find loopholes where the overall goal of what they are trying to do fails.
Re:Ohhh shiny (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure that's true to some extent, but it's 1) better than no environmental certification at all, and 2) Apple pulled out because they now glue their batteries to the chassis, thus making the batteries and chassis non-recyclable. It strikes me that being able to recycle batteries reduces a lot of chemical waste, and being able to recycle aluminum is one of the very best ROI's of any form of recycling (the energy required to refine aluminum from bauxite ore is orders of magnitude more than is required to smelt and refine previously refined aluminum)
Re:Ohhh shiny (Score:4, Funny)
Apple,
Design is EVERYTHING.
Looks pretty on the desk
looks pretty on your lap
looks pretty in your pocket
now you get to see it in one piece looking pretty in the dump too.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple defended the move by saying their products are environmentally superior in areas not measured by EPEAT."
They must mean those superior shiny rounded rectangular areas.
No, it means: "They should stick it up their ass".
False Dillema (Score:5, Insightful)
"Will they be the first of many, or will cheaper products override people's conscience?"
Considering Apple computers are more expensive than certified non-Apple computers; I think it is safe to say whether you are environmentally conscious or a bean counter the choice is definitely not new apple products.
Re:False Dillema (Score:4, Insightful)
And if you have to do thousands of repairs* because you have tens of thousands of computers the cost of repairs is very much a big deal.
*that isn't a criticism of apple, stuff breaks, usually due to stupid end users, but if you have enough computers a lot of things will break over the lifetime. That's what keeps half of the /. crowd employed.
Re:False Dillema (Score:5, Insightful)
and has there been a study if it's cheaper with apple or not? apple repairs can be darn expensive, unless you plan on using the applecare insurance card - in which case you should compare it with buying insurance with the non-apple pc too.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
and has there been a study if it's cheaper with apple or not? apple repairs can be darn expensive, unless you plan on using the applecare insurance card - in which case you should compare it with buying insurance with the non-apple pc too.
Who buys a computer without a warranty that covers it's expected usage period? In most European countries computer vendors are required by law to offer at least a two year warranty, some offer more than required as a sales incentive. I usually sell my laptops no more than a year after the legally required warranty expires. The bargain hunters who buy them know the risks they are taking, laptop and tablet repairs are always expensive to the point of being uneconomial. But even if the warranty has expired com
Re:False Dillema (Score:5, Insightful)
Who buys a computer without a warranty that covers its expected usage period? (...) If you skimped on household insurance as well as buying a computer that isn't covered by a warranty you are up a creek without a paddle when your device breaks down.
Yeah... What was I thinking? I've neither, and I had to shell out €125 the other day because I broke my MacBook's top case while opening it. Surely, had I not refused to cough an extra €200 or so to extend my warrantee period by two years when I bought my Mac in 2007, they wouldn't have told me that the warranty period is long ended and doesn't cover me opening my laptop to clean it.
Fwiw, the math is not in your favor... It is never in your interest to extend a warranty. If a PC/car/whatever maker offers you an extended warranty, you're on the receiving end of an overwhelmingly losing bet. The extended period being offered is, as a rule, the one they know carries about zero risk. When it might, they compensate by overcharging for out-of-warranty extras. And all too typically, they'll wiggle out of their obligations much like insurance companies do when you thought you were covered. If you add up the various costs that you save by not extending warranty periods, you're more than enough to cover the occasional repair, and you get to put the leftovers on a savings account.
Re:False Dillema (Score:4, Insightful)
* Who buys a computer without a warranty that covers it's expected usage period? *
This is /. , if anyone accidentally got a warranty, it was voided by tinkering soon thereafter. If something breaks, WE are the people who fix and usually improve it over the original design.
Re:False Dillema (Score:5, Insightful)
A non-Apple computer with a warranty is still cheaper than an Apple.
Re:False Dillema (Score:5, Funny)
Boy, you sure have very expensive fruit over there.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It really depends on what you want. Apple Computers are not overpriced! There is a limited selection of Apple computers. So you may not get what you are looking for.
Take an Apple Computer. Go to Dell, or HP, or Lenovo. Try to find the closest model that matches the Apple computer. Match the specs up... All the specs, if you can, none of this we don't need this feature idea (If apples keyboard glows find the upgrade to make the PC keyboard glow.) You will find that their price is about the same as the Ap
Re:False Dillema (Score:4, Informative)
Spec for Spec Apple is vastly more expensive, atleast it is here in the UK.
13" (resolution not advertised) Macbook Pro with a Core i5 2.5Ghz, 4GB RAM, 500GB (5400rpm) Sata HDD, Intel HD Graphics costs £999
15.6" 1080p Dell Laptop, Core i5 2.5Ghz, 6GB Ram, 500GB (7200rpm) Sata HDD, Ati Radeon HD 7670 Graphics Card costs £569
The 15" version of the Macbook costs £1499 and it's only improvements are an i7 which is only faster with Turboboost enabled and a Nvidia geforce GT 650M....
The dell has the Camera, Backlit Keyboard... yes it's heavier and thicker but what they hell difference does that make? That's Apple's whole market strategy, make people buy it because it's in a shiny case, even if it's is significantly less powerful. And all that compact case really does is make it almost impossible to fix and upgrade, the new Macbook Pro has the battery glued in! Pretty much making it impossible to protect from a short if should ever spill anything on it and need to remove the battery quickly.
Re: (Score:3)
For those of us that actually value our backs and need to haul their computers everywhere they go, that is a MASSIVE difference.
I am not arguing against you regarding price, but I am pointing out that aesthetics such as weight DO have a value. In fact, they have MORE value than the raw specs.
Consider that the average user isn't doing more than web browsing, email, word processing, etc. An i7 and a high end graphics chip is NOT going to help that. Having an OS that lets you doing the tasks you want to do
You get what you pay for (Score:3)
You can get a Chevy Impala with a lot more power than an Acura TL and at a cheaper price. Of course, the TL is a far better vehicle, better engineered, better built, more reliable, and overall more pleasant to use.
You pay for lightness and thinness in the notebook market regardless of the brand. Check out the prices on Sony's ultra-thin notebooks. Asus has competition to the MacBook Air. It's about $200 less, but it has a slower last-g
Re: (Score:3)
Re:False Dillema (Score:5, Informative)
Take an Apple Computer. Go to Dell, or HP, or Lenovo. Try to find the closest model that matches the Apple computer. Match the specs up... All the specs, if you can, none of this we don't need this feature idea (If apples keyboard glows find the upgrade to make the PC keyboard glow.) You will find that their price is about the same as the Apple computers price +/- $100.00
I did exactly this comparison a couple weeks ago
Envy 15
Display: 15.6" 1920x1080
Processor: 3rd generation Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3610QM Processor (2.3 GHz, 6MB L3 Cache)
Graphics: 1GB Radeon(TM) HD 7750M GDDR5 Graphics
Storage: 750GB 7200 rpm Hard Drive
Memory: 6GB 1600DDR3 System Memory (2 Dimm)
Height: 1.11 inches
Weight: 5.79 lbs
Warranty: 2 years
Price: $1,354.99
Macbook Pro 15
Display: 15.4" 1440 x 900
Processor" 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor (Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz) with 6MB L3 cache
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB of GDDR5
Storage: 500GB 5400-rpm hard drive
Memory: 4GB of 1600MHz DDR3
Height: 0.95 inch (2.41 cm)
Weight: 5.6 pounds
Warranty: 1 year
Price: $1799.00
For ~$450 less with the Envy I'm getting better graphics, more storage, more memory, better display, bigger display, longer warranty, and I'm also getting a quality build laptop with premium features like aluminum casing, slot load DVD, and backlit keyboard, and basic features not available on the Macbook pro like HDMI port, display port, 3 USB ports, higher maximum memory. The macbook pro has better battery life and is a little bit thinner and lighter. Oh and OSX of course. Is that worth $450? I don't know maybe to some but not me.
And by the way, this price is without any of the rebate ninja magic you can pull with HP. For my last purchase, and Envy 14, I got a discount off the list price, 30% off through Bing, and another $100 off just because I asked them. I paid over $1000 less for my Envy 14 (SSD, higher memory, better processor, higher resolution display) than for a similarly specced Macbook Pro 15 (minus the display size of course, but then again my display has a higher resolution than those displays did in 2010).
Re: (Score:3)
Re:False Dillema (Score:5, Interesting)
In my experience Apple gear is no more nor less likely to break than other good-quality stuff. Most of the internal components are the same after all. But the recent stuff is harder to repair of course; significantly more so than Lenovo for instance. Have to love a company that actually puts disassembly and repair manuals for their products on the web for anybody to view.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
In my experience Apple gear is no more nor less likely to break than other good-quality stuff. Most of the internal components are the same after all. But the recent stuff is harder to repair of course; significantly more so than Lenovo for instance. Have to love a company that actually puts disassembly and repair manuals for their products on the web for anybody to view.
This, statistically a Mac is no more likely to break then a Dell, the difference is the Dell will be out of commission for a day as they've got a NBD on-site support team almost everywhere, with Apple I have to take it to an authorised repairer and wait a week for them to do it, then pick it up myself.
BTW, It's awesome that Lenovo is publishing repair manuals, Dell has been doing the same for years. Not to mention it's dead simple to do easy repairs/upgrades like HDD, RAM or ODD's on most non-Apple compu
Well (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder about BYOD (Score:5, Insightful)
As more government and private organisations move to BYOD, where there is less control over these purchasing decisions I wonder if BYOD policies will also be updated to exclude employee's using devices that aren't adhering to EPEAT, I doubt it.
When I first heard this decision I just wondered if Apple were again abandoning the Enterprise market, because they can just attack the consumer market, which is now well and truly making inroads into Enterprise IT.
This is the top 5% the Occupy folks protest about! (Score:5, Funny)
The federal government, for example, requires 95% of its laptops and desktops be EPEAT-certified.
So, only the top 5% elite of government folks get Apples, and the other 95% normal folks just get inferior, non-cool and non-chic EPEAT made of unreliable biodegradable materials that dissolve in the rain! This just isn't fair! Why should only the top 5% get Apples!
Occupy the federal government!
Wait... (Score:2, Interesting)
You're implying that Apple are the cheaper products?...
This is blindingly obvious (Score:5, Interesting)
Or obliviously blinding? (Gotta be one of the two! :D )
Anyway, the deal is that apple is used to living in the reality distortion bubble.
The reality that their design choices have political consequences, and that these consequences should and will have effects on the salability of their offerings is not respected, because they are used to altered reality where their design choices are fawned over and lauded as innovative and amazing.
In this case, we have a clearly foolish decision (ignore the EPEAT requirements for service and recycling), so that they can enforce an ideological position (our way is best, and we won't compromise. You should just change your requirements, because our products are just so awesome that they floor the competiton in every imaginable metric, including environmental friendliness!) that is sure to come back to haunt them. (Strict fed reqs regarding EPEAT compliance means no apple products purchased, and existing ones are phased out for compliant replacements.)
I am actually enjoying the spectacle of reality creeping into the fantasyland antics at apple. Hopefully they will learn their lesson that projecting a false reality hs consequences that they can't just wish away, and come away wiser for it.
The problem is Apple exceeds all the requirements (Score:5, Insightful)
...in any practical sense. You're correct that these design choices have consequences, but your interpretation, which appears to be that Apple products are actually less green because of it, is completely false.
The EPEAT requirements are dated, and Apple provides comprehensive recycling for all of its products, making the ability to disassemble them moot — do you really believe individuals, businesses, or government agencies are disassembling Apple — or any other — products themselves for recycling? Those parts of the EPEAT guidelines are designed that way so that all manufacturers' products are broadly recyclable.
BUT APPLE HAS A FREE RECYCLING PROGRAM FOR ALL OF ITS PRODUCTS, not to mention leads the industry in the amount of recyclable materials in its products. In other words, even without EPEAT, Apple is still better than other manufacturers on the environment front [apple.com]. Now, it's understandable that government and institutional customers would look to such a standard, because it makes things easier and has many other benefits — but Apple not being a part of EPEAT doesn't mean Apple is "less green" in a real sense.
For what it's worth, this is Apple's response [loopinsight.com].
Re:The problem is Apple exceeds all the requiremen (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of people, myself included, obviously disagree.
Apple having their own "recycling program" doesn't solve the problem. The requirement isn't for a buy-back program, or for a company to have a disposal program with the word "recycle" in it, the requirement is to meet actual real life physical standards that recycling companies have. Those companies have worked with the government already to come up with the EPEAT standard.
And you miss the point. We actually care about recycling, that is why we support these types of standards. Just because the glue gets in the way by the time the recycled goods have worked their way downstream into the care of foreign companies, doesn't make a bit of difference. We want it to, in the end, eventually be disassembled and recycled.
There is also some trickery when you claim Apple "leads the industry in the amount of recyclable materials in its products." Yes it is true that they have lots of materials listed as recyclable, but that is what this is about; once you glue them together, they are no longer recyclable... and yet Apple still lists them because the material itself is still categorized as recyclable, even if the part made from it no longer is.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple helped create the EPEAT standard alongside the other stakeholders who helped define it.
And you have missed my point: I actually care about recycling, which is why I'm making this argument in the first place. You're making the claim that, e.g., the Retina MacBook Pro can't be disassembled and recycled. But Apple has a zero-landfill recycling program for all their products — which includes the Retina MacBook Pro. So to cut to the chase, are you saying Apple is lying, or doesn't have a technique to
Re:The problem is Apple exceeds all the requiremen (Score:5, Insightful)
The point is that EPEAT alone isn't the end-all, be-all of green certifications. Organizations use EPEAT because it is a metric; a box that is easy to check; an easy way to define the "greenness" of a product. Apple helped develop the EPEAT standard, and has been one of the most committed and transparent manufacturers to green tech, environment, and recycling.
Apple pulled all of its products — even all of them that are certified — because EPEAT isn't consistent with Apple's design directions. Apple explicitly told EPEAT this. EPEAT requires that the products be able to be completely disassembled with normal tools for recycling. The Retina MacBook Pros do not meet this.
But Apple will completely recycle the laptops itself (other manufacturers do not do this), and even contracts with a zero-landfill recycler [srsapp.com] to recycle ANY brand of equipment for free.
If you can't understand that Apple might exceed EPEAT in real, practical terms, including more than other certified manufacturers, then you're unlikely to understand Apple's motivations for departing EPEAT because the EPEAT standard simply doesn't reflect in real terms what Apple does to be "green". What if someone meets EPEAT for disassembly and percentage of recyclable parts, but it's a lot lower percentage than Apple? In what world does that make the lesser product "more green"?
Re: (Score:3)
EPEAT itself has admitted that their certifications are outdated. Back in March, a board member of theirs who was acting as interim-CEO addressed the question of what the new CEO's chief mandate would be (emphasis mine):
Part of it is expanding EPEAT's global reach through the multiple certification [process]; as well as moving into new, additional products; as well as updating the EPEAT [certifications], because they're a little long in the tooth. [Each of those] is a huge project on its own.
Source [greenbiz.com]
I discussed this in a response to the last article about EPEAT, but they've failed to keep up with the times. There are a number of factors they fail to consider which render many of their current arguments moot. To shoehorn a car analogy in, it'd be similar to if you were unable to g
Re:This is blindingly obvious (Score:5, Informative)
Not exactly.
The issue here is that in order for a recycling program to be effective, it has to be sufficiently easy for things to be recycled, that there is a financial benefit for said recycling. Otherwise, recycling has no incentive.
The design choices at apple make it too difficult to properly seperate the battery from the housing.
From an engineering standpoint, this is ideal! You don't want the battery falling out!
From a recycling standpoint, this is deplorable! You can't recycle the LiON battery pack without incuring a significant loss!
Rather than accept that they need to implement a less ideal retainer mechanism for their batteries, apple has thumbed their nose at regulators.
There will be consequences.
Case closed.
Re: (Score:3)
From an engineering standpoint, this is ideal! You don't want the battery falling out!
From an engineering standpoint it is a terrible idea. Batteries are consumable items, they will wear out and eventually fail no matter what. Any part which will inevitably need replacement should be as easy as possible to change.
Apple actually realized this in the past. Older Macbooks had the HDD buried deep inside where it was not easy to change. HDDs are the number one point of failure in laptops. After a few revisions and doubtless numerous complaints from the repair department they made them easy to get
Re: (Score:3)
The issue here is that in order for a recycling program to be effective, it has to be sufficiently easy for things to be recycled, that there is a financial benefit for said recycling. Otherwise, recycling has no incentive.
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/reuse_and_recycle [apple.com]
Just found out my 1st gen 16Gig/3G ipad is worth $125 dollars for recycle.
My daughter's old slightly beat up 3GS is worth $95.
Hmmm, maybe time for a new iPad.
Re:This is blindingly obvious (Score:4, Informative)
apple then sends the unit to a 3rd world country, where it is disassembled using hazardous but cheap methods
Nope.
This is Apple's recycling vendor. [simsrecycling.com] They don't ship anything out of the country.
Got anything else you want to make up, or have you embarrassed yourself enough?
The letter of the law... (Score:2, Funny)
I believe Apple doesn't want to comply with the EPEAT standard because it doesn't start with a lower case 'i' --> iPEAT
If you really care about the environment (Score:3)
You probably shouldn't buy any smart phones or tablets of any brand - EPEAT doesn't even attempt to certify those.
I have to wonder how effective this will actually be. There are processes to get around this ban - they're supposedly onerous, but the city would of course claim that whether it were really true or not.
Apple claims they'll recycle any computer returned to them. It would be interesting to pin them down on the specifics regarding how their non-EPEAT-certified hardware is recycled, piece by piece.
meh! (Score:2)
cheaper computers usually don't have EPEAT certification anyway. What share of sales would SF account for? very little I would guess.
sigh... (Score:3, Funny)
I have a really witty comment about San Francisco stopping buying Apple computers, but it's in poor taste, and would probably be perceived as an attempt at flamsterbaition, rather than the sincere attempt at being a smartass that it would actually be.
So I'll skip posting it, but you might want to pretend I did and mod me town as a troll anyway, just for thinking of it.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect that same "witty comment" immediately popped into a lot of our heads - whether we are Apple fans or foes. It's just too easy.
One of them must be lying (Score:2)
"Apple defended the move by saying their products are environmentally superior in areas not measured by EPEAT."
First line from front page of the EPEAT website:
"EPEAT is a comprehensive environmental rating..."
Less than $50K of computers (Score:2)
Which means they were for "select few". And I kinda doubt that those who want a new Retina MBP will not get one -- they'll probably simply expense it (instead of having the IT department buy them one). :)
Either that, or there will be a new exemption soon, for "ultra-thin computers" with "has to be able to disassemble" requirement removed
Rules are *not* made to be broken in gov't (Score:3)
Apple's problem is the EPEAT certification is required by government. If you don't meet the requirements, your bid won't even pass the first round of competition.
Period.
It doesn't matter how "cool" or "popular" your devices are -- you lose the bid.
They made their design decisions knowing they wouldn't be EPEAT certified, now it's time to suck up the result: lost business.
Dear Apple (Score:3)
Instead of using glue that's difficult to remove, why not use the same stuff that's used in those 3M Command [command.com] removable wall hangers? When you need to separate the components, just give the little strip a tug and the glue pops right out!
If... (Score:3)
If Apple products are superior to EPEAT standards, then why stop getting EPEAT certification? Apple should re-think this. Not only will government agencies and municipalities quit buying, because they are required to meet EPEAT, the environmentally concerned will, too. I can see the MIcrosoft slogan now: Save a tree, buy a Windows PC.
Re:Who the eff cares? (Score:5, Funny)
Are people around the world basing their IT decisions on what the City of San Francisco does?
Yes, we're planning to incarcerate our network security guy in Q4.
Re:Who the eff cares? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes... (Score:5, Insightful)
San Francisco does today what the more advanced parts of the developed world will do tomorrow. It is enormously influential. Its geography is a roll call of large parts of the US computer industry. The first development system I ever used came from Marin County, the second operating system from a place called Berkeley, and much of what has followed has come from Cupertino or Palo Alto. And a slap from the City Council for the largest corporation in the area will play well with the residents.
Re: (Score:2)
San Francisco does today what the more advanced parts of the developed world will do tomorrow.
Nonsense, that kind of thing has been popular since the ancient Greeks. Already happening all the over the world and we need to accept it as part of the rich diversity of human culture.
Antikythera mechanism (Score:2)
At least that's my assumption. Perhaps you are referring to some other activity. But that would be unlikely, since only trolls do that on Slashdot.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you cannot disassemble them to separate the components, then they are not recyclable. Thats the big issue here: Apple is now making their products so it is impossible to taking it apart by gluing dissimilar components together.
Re: (Score:2)
They can still be recycled. They might not be repaired or refurbished, but recycled, sure.
I brought several P3 and P4 machines to my recycling center. They probably weren't resold, but I'm pretty sure they got recycled.
But it's kind of a dick move from Apple,.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
The deal with the glue is that it makes the recycling effort cost prohibitive, and removes the already small margin for fiscal incentive for said recycling. The glued features cannot be easily seperated, increasing the cost to recycle above a critical metric.
Apple says it won't stop this practice, because finding an alternative means they would have to make thicker devices, or devices more likely to come apart on their own.
The consequence of this decision is that they are no longer EPEAT certified, and now their products are less salable.
What is so hard to comprehend here?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Most recycling starts out cost prohibitive because it's inefficient. The profits come from subsidy. The glue makes it even more inefficient, and so the required subsidy is bigger if they're going to bother.
Re: (Score:3)
Since AppleCare handles the batteries as well, and Apple will replace them for $200, it stands to reason that Apple has a way to properly remove the batteries. Probably a solvent of some kind that is specific to the glue they use.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Informative)
They'll just replace your laptop.
I went to an Apple store the other day to replace my now dead battery out of my iPhone 3GS. I left with a brand new iPhone 3GS (or refurbished, I don't know, but not the unit I walked in with).
Re: (Score:3)
And that 3GS will later be repaired, refurbished, then either resold or given to another customer like yourself.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
...they'll do it in China, where labor costs are low and the special solvents aren't banned yet.
Re:conscience? (Score:4, Informative)
special solvents? I use fricking Goo gone.
any idiot can fix an iphone or ipad if you know how and have the right tools.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Informative)
Speaking as one who has seen Apple refurb lines at Foxconn in Shenzhen, this is correct. They'll reuse the main board and the display (if the backlight still meets the spec), but not the case or the external connectors. They don't want any visible wear on a refurb unit.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Interesting)
According to an AC comment on the previous discussion about this by someone who claimed to have access to their internal servicing documents, Apple just replaces the whole keyboard, upper case and battery assembly on the new Macbook Pro with Retina Display as a single unit. Apparently they can't unglue the batteries either.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Interesting)
On the flip side, the significantly larger quantities of aluminum (as opposed to plastic) probably offset the glue removal in the cost balance equation.
EPEAT defines specific processes for recycling and doesn't acknowledge other alternatives or new technologies. Even with the glue, the brand new Macbook Pro I'm typing on right now is more recyclable than any laptop which uses screws to attach batteries to the chasis.
LEED (green building construction) is a much better model for certifications like this because it's flexible. No one single "dirty" technique would cost you certification. Instead, you earn points for doing a myriad of different things for cumulative score used for certification.
Adhering to strictly-defined standards results in stagnant products and services, since the government is rarely pressured to update their certification requirements.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
www.apple.com/recycling
Actually, I think it has more to do with Foxconn (Score:3, Interesting)
The June 2012 changes to the EPAT verification criteria require them to permit on-site compliance audits by third parties.
I'm thinking someone with a long history of working for Samsung has enough familiarity with the electronics industry to be a qualified third party auditor, then quit the auditing company and go back to work for Samsung.
This seems to be an attempt to look in Apple's manufacturing shorts to see how their assembly lines are run.
Oh my god (Score:5, Informative)
Can people really be this pig ignorant about what recycling entails?
Recycling is NOT dumping it in a landfill, burning it OR bringing it to a recycling center. It is about removing materials requiring special handling and separating a product into distinct materials so those materials can be re-used.
For metal, this is easy. You can simply take a complete car, grind it up, melt and scoop all the bits non-metal. You have fully recycled the metal... but still, burning all that plastic, battery acid, glass is a bit nasty.
You COULD use a magnet to separate the metal from the rest but not all metals are magnetic and this will STILL leave you with a mess of non-metal that would take a legion to sort by hand.
So, how do you REALLY recycle a car? You take it apart. You remove the plastic bumper and put it on the pile with other plastic parts that you know are the same type of plastic because it is stamped on the part. Same types of plastics can be for better recycled then a pile of all sorts combined. This goes so far that for instance plastic bottles can be shredded and just melted into new ones. Failed bottles at production go right back into the process.
Once you separated all the different materials, you can re-use them or dispose of them in a safe manner. But the separation must be relatively easy OR the costs just sky-rocket. Taking of a bumper is easy especially if you don't have to care about damage. Separating two bonded plates, not so much.
A prime example of this is in electricity cables. Copper is expensive enough to make recycling worth while but separating it from the plastic surrounding it, is near impossible. What is done instead in many places is that the plastic is burned off. A very polluting process and not the idea behind recycling at all.
Now Apples devices are hard to take apart. If a screen can't be screwed open, the screen can't be separated from the shell, meaning it has to be shredded instead. You can still reclaim some materials but not as easily as with a screw driver.
The above poster seems to think that recycling means re-using working parts or re-selling the entire device. This is a FORM of recycling but NOT what this article is about. In the end, after re-selling the device will either end up in a landfill, be dumped OR be taken apart. The first two are wasteful, the second becomes more costly when the separate materials are harder to separate. Apple has basically said, we don't give a fuck about the environment and try to hide it by saying they are better but in areas nobody measures. Well, I am a better sportsman then anyone at the Olympics, just not in any Olympic sport.
Re:Oh my god (Score:5, Interesting)
You COULD use a magnet to separate the metal from the rest but not all metals are magnetic and this will STILL leave you with a mess of non-metal that would take a legion to sort by hand.
I wholly agree with your post, but I have one addition/correction. It is in fact possible to separate out non-magnetic metals from the waste stream (or in fact anything that conducts), using a clever device called an eddy current separator [wikipedia.org]. It uses a varying magnetic field to induct an eddy current in any conducting bits of trash, which in turn creates an EM field. The two fields repel, and the conductive part is flung away from the non-conductive thrash. Here's [walkermagnet.com] a link to a company that makes them with a bit more explanation.
"Plastic is burned off" (Score:5, Informative)
As for car batteries, I believe they are about 95% recyclable. Although sulfuric acid is nasty stuff, it is easy to pour off and treat. In fact, most liquid handling is very easy with well established procedures. Years ago the company I worked for acquired a plating plant (tanks of alkali, nickel and chrome salts, cyanides, concentrated sulfuric acid, you name it). Our insurers promptly cancelled our insurance. The local safety executive recommended us to a specialist insurer, who told us that, though many insurance companies were frightened of plating plants, they actually have an excellent safety record and rarely result in insurance claims. It is a matter of sticking to well-established procedures. There is no reason at all why recycling plants should not be the same.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, your evidence that stuff can be recycled is that you went to a recycling center and dumped your stuff there? You do realize that most the stuff ends up as conventional waste?
Re:conscience? (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess they use magic or something, and recyclers are normal people so they are unable to tear apart the new MBP's.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Informative)
Replacing the Retina batteries involves the replacement of the enclosure as well (source : iFixit).
Captcha : poorer ...
Re: (Score:3)
Supposedly, they offer battery replacement by removing the entire upper chassis, battery, keyboard and trackpad assembly, throwing it out, and installing a new assembly [slashdot.org]. Likewise, screen replacement involves replacing the entire lid assembly as a sealed unit.
Re: (Score:2)
If you cannot disassemble them to separate the components, then they are not recyclable. Thats the big issue here: Apple is now making their products so it is impossible to taking it apart by gluing dissimilar components together.
You use the word "impossible" very lightly. If you were working for the recycler who gets a few hundred thousand Apple laptops for recycling, and your boss would tell you to figure out how to recycle them, would you say "its impossible"? I think your boss would say "if it is impossible for you, I'll hire someone who can figure it out".
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It is possible to remove a glued on component. Glue does not actually form an eternal bond.
Re:conscience? (Score:5, Funny)
What? Apple's using inferior glue? Why, that's outrageous! Demand GNLUE, the free adhesive that will liberate us all from Apple's proprietary, impermanent adhesives!
Re: (Score:2)
It is possible to remove a glued on component. Glue does not actually form an eternal bond.
Yes it is possible, but only if said component has rounded corners!
Re: (Score:2)
Do the words "hazmat", and "lawsuit" mean anything?
Lion battery packs are sensitive to heat and rupture. Manhandling with a putty knife greatly increases the risk of rupturing the battery, which increases the risk that process employees will come into contact with dangerous lithium salts. Heating the pack sufficiently to dislodge the glue means heating the pack above the electrolyte boiling temp, and potentially exploding the battery, or otherwise destabilizing the cell in a dangerous way.
Either practice op
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Heaven forbid somebody replace their stock 500gb drive with a 1.5TB one!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Wow, you seriously know nothing about the current state of these products. It is prohibitively expensive to separate the materials now. Sure it's possible, but it's not cost effective anymore. This is the whole reason Apple left the initiative. They recognize their machines can't be easily recycled anymore and they're perfectly fine with this shit finding its way into landfills if it means their pretty hardware can be even prettier.
Although Apple will take them back, my response is (Score:2)
...how generous of them to take away my very expensive hardware (that would have otherwise only needed minor repair) in exchange for a 10% discount on an iPod. /sarcasm
This move by Apple shows they no longer have any shred of conscience post-Jobs and that is the final straw for me. The very minimum I would expect from a corp trying to be responsible in conjunction with a move like this would be to extend the warranty options (by years) over what is currently available through Applecare. If you think that is