Ask iFixit. They've been saying for a while now that glued together products are incredibly difficult to recycle. But hey, Apple can make their laptops 1mm thinner, so who cares about the environment eh?
If EPEAT is outmoded, or basically won't listen to Apple's stance on the matter, Apple needs more of an explanation to the public. The educational circles that were the backbone of Apple sales in the early 2000s are owed some sort of explanation b/c of the money spent on them in the past and the rug pulled out from under their feet. In addition, the Federal entity I work for has already contacted Apple and is in talks with them about this topic. It turns out Apple had no clue that we were "big customers" because we bought our machines through a third party - that was not at all affiliated with Apple.
The way it works: Just because Apple does not see the sales directly from the Government to their door does not mean those entities do not purchase quantifiably LARGE amounts of Apple products. There are reasons fiscally speaking to not buy directly.
The negative impact will be felt, and as long as zero explanation is given we're going to see more issues arise. Entire swaths of purchases are being reviewed. I agree that EPEAT might be out of date, but I think walking away is the wrong thing to do. Coming to the table, renegotiating with everyone involved, and also talking this out with big entities is probably a good idea. If Universities, Federal agencies, and other groups were let known about this I think they would have been vocal enough to tell EPEAT to update their requirements for this generation of Post-PC era products.
To do anything else would literally hamstring EPEAT and make it a useless entity; one that Apple helped build. I doubt they want that moniker. "Co-founder of defunct, useless, and incompetent environmental regulators." That's a great title.
I know what you're saying. Even though I'm bashing San Francisco here, the politicians in my city aren't much better. In my city, the mini-Stalin of a mayor is banning soda! Somebody needs to remind these people that this is the USA and not North Korea.
Yes, but only ten percent of people vote. The people get what they deserve.
The thing about not complying with EPEAT standards is the disassembly with common tools part. I don't think a heat gun is a common tool at least not in the sense of a screwdriver or wire cutters.
Gluing the battery does make sense from an assembly perspective, we just need to wait and see what Apple's plans are with regard to recycling the new MBP. It would be inconsistent for them to disregard the recyclability of the product since all other aspects of their enterprise seems to focus quite deliberately on environmental responsibility such as the case with their green initiatives in their data center construction.
Life is too short to drink bad coffee.
Life is too short to drink bad coffee.
Probably close to the truth.
Part of government standards like these is also ensuring competitiveness. If only Apple were able to meet stringent standards, they would in effect become a sole source supplier. Try explaining that to taxpayers.
I don't get the slamming of San Francisco. It's standard for many governments at municipal and state level to follow federal standards. Why would anybody expect San Fran to suddenly re-write the book for Apple? Would all of you feel the same way if the city council re-wrote their buying guide to qualify a non-compliant car manufacturer?
The non-upgradeability of the RMBP has just about tipped me away from buying an Apple replacement for my 2007 MBP. I already have an iPad, and I hate it...it feels like an iJail and not a walled garden. Figuring out how to move files around from program to program is excruciatingly frustrating. If you don't want to do things Apple's way on the device, well...actually you have to do it Apple's way. If iOS is the future of computing, I want no part of it. I have watched NeXT grow in my university days...it was a beautiful operating system, designed right from the ground up. When it became OS X I was quite happy. I love its elegance, from how it integrates pdf throughout the system, to how its security features are practical but not intrusive. Using an iPad has been a rude awakening. The simple fact that I cannot see my own root filesystem is irksome beyond belief.
There seems to be a philosophy growing at Apple that takes control away from the user. Freedom to upgrade in the case of most Apple devices, and now of late even in their latest laptop. Freedom to tinker and explore in the case of iOS. Yes Apple devices are pleasant to use. They are simple, they are pretty. But I am not willing to give up my freedoms for the sake of a few mm, a few pounds, or a bit of increased security.
I am most likely going to make my next computer a unix laptop of some kind. I know it will be clunky and unpolished. I know I will have to mess around in the command line. I know most users wouldn't really like such a machine. It won't be unibody. It will be plastic. It won't have much of the software that I have grown accustomed to. But at least I won't be subject to the whims of Apple.
I don't live there thankfully, though I did pass through there briefly once. I was there for business purposes and didn't have the time to see much of the city, and I doubt that I missed out on much.
And San Francisco doesn't matter much to me obviously, I'm just commenting on this particular article, which has to with San Francisco and their banning of Macs.
I am not sure that school trips count as business. Sorry crayon boy.
Is that any more or less insane than criticising bodies who were convinced by Apple et al that they should only purchase EPEAT registered products in the first place
Go ahead with your heated paint scraper. I'll bet you wouldn't like to get a job scraping such batteries off with a heated blade for a few years. See how you like placing a heated object near a lithium cells filled with lots of fun toxic volatile chemicals day in and day out. Take a nice deep breath. Mmmmmm...cancer.
But what's the real deal? Is Apple's new "design direction" simply ignoring environmental concerns (producing dirty but cute iStuff), is the EPEAT certification somehow faulty (to which Apple objects), or is something else going on?
My guess is that they want to force changes in the standard. Note that EPEAT rates the ability for regular waste processors to recycle equipment. It says nothing about a manufacturer's own recycling program. An EPEAT-certified computer that gets tossed in the trash is no better for the environment than a non-EPEAT-certified Mac that gets returned to Apple for recycling at one of its processors.
I am most likely going to make my next computer a unix laptop of some kind. I know it will be clunky and unpolished. I know I will have to mess around in the command line. I know most users wouldn't really like such a machine. It won't be unibody. It will be plastic. It won't have much of the software that I have grown accustomed to. But at least I won't be subject to the whims of Apple.
You are going to be part of a niche, however. It's your prerogative, but be aware of the risks. Microsoft is heading in the same direction. Most users want PCs to be appliances, the way cars have been for the past 20 years or so. People generally don't "tweak" their dishwashers or TVs. They plug them in and use them. That's where both Apple and Microsoft see things heading in the "post-PC" world.
You are going to be part of a niche, however. It's your prerogative, but be aware of the risks. Microsoft is heading in the same direction. Most users want PCs to be appliances, the way cars have been for the past 20 years or so. People generally don't "tweak" their dishwashers or TVs. They plug them in and use them. That's where both Apple and Microsoft see things heading in the "post-PC" world.
Yes, I suppose I will be a niche. But I think Apple should be careful not to anger users like me. I am a teacher. I have brought my MBP to work every day, because I hate working on the locked up MS crap workstations that are provided. That MBP has a nice Apple icon that faces the class every day. It is quite an advertisement. I teach the elite kids, the ones who will go on to be engineers and such. Since I am something of a role model, my choices matter to quite a few students. I have over the last few years been quite positive about OSX. I have discussed the differing engineering philosophies between MS and OSX. I have discussed how OSX is unix based and how unix was from the beginning an operating system that was designed to run multi-user mainframes, and had to e secure and robust. I think I have likely influenced quite a few purchasing decisions. I am one of those users who has played an outsize role in the ascendency of Apple over the past few years. If I choose to buy and use a proper unix laptop, I suspect I will influence some important students.
You say that most people don't tweak their dishwashers or TV's. That is true. However, the freedom that proper computers have provided have given all everyday users freedoms and services that they have grown accustomed to. If computers had been designed early on as locked down appliances, I doubt the world wide web would have come into existence. The large network players, such as, say AOL or Compuserve would have done everything in their power to prevent such a powerful competing network. They would likely have done deals with the companies controlling the locked down computing machines to lock out or cripple competing technologies. You can see such tendencies in closed platforms such as the PS3, where Sony does a great deal to push you into their Playstation Network, or into Netflix, or their other partners. The web browser is an afterthought.
Also, free computing and free networking vis the Internet brought filesharing, which put pressure on the media conglomerates to loosen their grip on content distribution. iTunes was only grudgingly accepted after filesharing had already become rampant. Now we take digital distribution for granted, but if computers had been as locked down as, say the PS3 or even the iPad, I doubt these things would have come into existence in the form they appear in today.
I suppose my main point is this: I do not want to have my freedom to run the software of my choice beholden to the whim of any particular company. One can argue that Apple has been fairly benign in its control of iOS but the fact that it does have such control causes me concern for the future of computing freedom. For that reason, I will make decisions to consume in such as way as to go against the "post PC era". That will include running a clunky unix laptop.
I'm not certain it is fair to say that Apple knows best. But Apple certainly knows how to turn a buck, and knows how to influence public opinion.
My guess is that their EPEAT decision will not result in significantly diminished profitability.
If Canada wasn't so damn polite and gave all the territory they won off the USA back, everything North of the Mississippi would be Canada right now.
I'm pretty sure that everything North of the Mississippi IS Canada. Doesn't the Mississippi start in Minnesota?
This is a genuine question - Do standards such as EPEAT, etc (actually, any "green" program) take into account things like product lifespan, etc? And cost of manufacturing? Or just "on a single day comparison, X vs Y?
As an example:
PC X life expectancy of 3 years
Mac life expectancy of 4 years.
12 years = 3 Macs vs 4 PCs.
Not saying any of this is realistic number wise, but I mean is this something that is looked at.
Another example. "Waterless" toilets. We have them at work. ALWAYS have the blue chemical leaking, service guys coming out (in their big trucks), etc. Is this REALLY a net improvement? What goes into making and recycling Pirus batteries. Or Chevy Volt ones.
Not saying we shouldn't advance, but is this "cost" accounted for?
The following has already been mentioned never-the-less it is worth repeating- heating batteries with a heat gun is not a good idea.
On a wider point, whilst the Apple recycling scheme will overcome many of the perceived problems not all Macs will be returned to Apple.
History shows that history is perhaps the most useless subject since we are doomed to repeat it, all the knowledge does is let you see the freight train at the end of the tunnel, not like you can do anything about it.
But lets use history to "forecast":
- Apple has been focusing on its target market which is becoming more and more: upper class teenagers. As the global economy continues to degenerate, the "professional" class which are the buyers of their pro machines will shrink since they will have less people able to pay them for service. In five years or so, they will only have iOS devices, in ten years they will become like Nokia, the Android market will have beaten them, and they will release their first Android Device.
- A more accurate prediction is as time approaches infinity, everything disintegrates, proving that all is meaningless.
Considering how most people just toss their old computers into the trash bin, EPEAT is meaningless, people are too selfish and lazy to recycle. The only surprise is I thought their current market was "Prosumers" who need to feel "special" when they want to show off to people that they are "writing" in the Starbucks. The lack of EPEAT must be a blow to their superiority complex.
I already have an iPad, and I hate it...it feels like an iJail and not a walled garden. Figuring out how to move files around from program to program is excruciatingly frustrating. If you don't want to do things Apple's way on the device, well...actually you have to do it Apple's way.
I feel the same way about iOS. I loved my 3GS for about a day and a half. Then I got totally frustrated when I was repeatedly told by the Apple help line that what I wanted simply was impossible.
I really hate the launcher. There is no choice whatsoever except "snap to grid". So I tried to find an alternate launcher. Yeah, right. Apple didn't allow any such thing to be available, and short of Jailbreaking, there was no other place to even search for software.
That stuff blew my mind, I thought I was getting a pocket computer, and yet there were artificial limitations baked in from the ground up. I was coming from the PalmOS, which was pretty much exactly the opposite in attitude. Anybody could do anything-they were encouraged to advance the platform, and not handcuffed.
