Apple acknowledges 'mistake,' places eligible products back on EPEAT - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 

It signals weakness, lack of managerial attention, and/or lack careful planning. Also, the lack of an explanation, in at least the environmental portion of Apple's website, was really horrible PR. Recall the AI article about how Apple was hoping to push standards forward, smartphones and tablets not being covered, etc? Is that all out the window?

 

Incidentally, to whom exactly is Mansfield apologizing? Was there a mass consumer uprising that we never heard about? Or is it to the Greenpeaces of the world?

 

Overall, disappointingly un-Apple like in how this has been executed.

 

Do the thinking first.

Oh, and Apple has backtracked before. Remember the iPhone price drop and resulting refund? Mistakes are not un-Apple like. It's run by humans. What was Apple-like was the speed of the reaction. Four days? That's fast.

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdasd 

That's.....weird.

 Not really. Apple likely doesn't really view it as a mistake at all. They like things simple and avoiding confusion over what is and isn't EPEAT goes with that simplicity. 

They got some complaints by companies with a strict not EPEAT, can't buy it rule so they are ditching the whole simple in order to shut up those folks and others like them who don't want to be bothered with trying to get the rules changed. Sometimes you just have to do it rather than stand firm. 

but in the end it won't matter much because Apple isn't going to change their design practices to fit EPEAT and in another round or two of releases none of their stuff will qualify anyway and they won't be admitting to any mistakes at that point. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 

It signals weakness, lack of managerial attention, and/or lack careful planning. Also, the lack of an explanation, in at least the environmental portion of Apple's website, was really horrible PR. Recall the AI article about how Apple was hoping to push standards forward, smartphones and tablets not being covered, etc? Is that all out the window?

 

Incidentally, to whom exactly is Mansfield apologizing? Was there a mass consumer uprising that we never heard about? Or is it to the Greenpeaces of the world?

 

Overall, disappointingly un-Apple like in how this has been executed.

 

Do the thinking first.

Perhaps you are being too harsh.  It is a PR fiasco, certainly.  What we need is a full explanation from Tim Cook.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alonso Perez 

 

Huh? What does it signal? To me it signals intelligence.

 

Macho, double-down management is for third-world autocrats and Hitler fans. Flexibility is much smarter, especially when addressing the concerns of an important subgroup of Apple customers.

And Godwins Law makes an early appearance. ;) Post 17.

Here are the most interesting statements by both sides:

Quote:

Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

Apple makes the most environmentally responsible products in our industry. In fact, our engineering teams have worked incredibly hard over the years to make our products even more environmentally friendly, and much of our progress has come in areas not yet measured by EPEAT.

 

...

 

Our relationship with EPEAT has become stronger as a result of this experience, and we look forward to working with EPEAT as their rating system and the underlying IEEE 1680.1 standard evolve.

Bob

and

This alludes to some sort of power struggle between Apple Inc. and the Green Electronics Council.

Let's say Apple approaches the Green Electronics Council proposing changes to EPEAT, perhaps some that would disqualify some products from its competitors. Perhaps there was an uproar by others in the industry and the Council voted down on Apple's proposed changes to EPEAT.

Or what if it were something like "let's use EPEAT on smartphones and tablets" (the EPEAT standard is so old, neither product category is covered). If other smartphone manufacturers weren't ready for EPEAT, do you think they'd be willing to proceed?

So, then Apple called the Green Electronics Council's bluff by walking away. While the public and media scratched their heads at Apple's actions, the Green Electronics Council probably realized that they couldn't have such a prominent corporation give them the "no confidence" vote. It would be like the USA leaving the United Nations (note that the predecessor League of Nations failed since USA refused to sign up). So the Green Electronics Council folded.

While the public written statements make it sound like Apple's fault, the aforementioned quotes point to something that happened behind the scenes.

It is likely that the Green Electronics Council blinked.

As a matter of fact, Apple probably knew from the beginning that it would end up like this and that they would need some sort of scapegoat (the outgoing Mansfield, a guy who has never really spoken for Apple on a public relations level). They could have left EPEAT last year or next year, it probably wouldn't have mattered. My guess is that they had this planned for a while, and the idea was probably Steve's. They just needed the right opportunity.

This whole thing smacks of a Steve Jobs power play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogifan 

I am curious how they came to this decision and why they reversed course so quickly. If it was because of the backlash from consumers how could they not have anticipated this would be the case? And why send someone out to defend the decision only to reverse course a couple days later? Is it amateur hour at Apple or something?

Apple frequently reacts very quickly when they come to the conclusion they made a mistake. It's not the first time, and won't be the last. Think iPhone price drop and refund. Think FinalCut Pro availability.

The ability to change your mind was a hallmark of Steve Jobs. He did it early and often.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstone 

But the new MBP not being EPEAT certified due to glued battery is still a problem for them right?

 

Seems like they could use a different glue that wasn't so strong and the battery could be detached more easily.

 

well if they are going to change the glue why not stop using it all together. And stop using the torque screws that are the other part of the issue. 

Not going to happen. Apple does as they want for their reasons. If in 3 years those screws and that glue means nothing qualifies for EPEAT so be it. They will position that the issue isn't them but the standards used by EPEAT for that gold star rating. They will point out that in the meantime they have set up their own recycling system where they remove the batteries etc themselves, where they return usable parts and materials back into the eco system instead of just shredding them etc but EPEAT is ignoring that to focus on screws and glue so that Bubba's EWaste Recycling Center can keep running on old methods etc. And Apple being Apple they will probably win that argument. 

They made a mistake and they big enough to admit it and correct it - nice to see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 

Here are the most interesting statements by both sides:

 

and

 

 

 

 

This alludes to some sort of power struggle between Apple Inc. and the Green Electronics Council.

 

Let's say Apple approaches the Green Electronics Council proposing changes to EPEAT, perhaps some that would disqualify some products from its competitors. Perhaps there was an uproar by others in the industry and the Council voted down on Apple's proposed changes to EPEAT.

 

Or what if it were something like "let's use EPEAT on smartphones and tablets" (the EPEAT standard is so old, neither product category is covered). If other smartphone manufacturers weren't ready for EPEAT, do you think they'd be willing to proceed?

 

So, then Apple called the Green Electronics Council's bluff by walking away. While the public and media scratched their heads at Apple's actions, the Green Electronics Council probably realized that they couldn't have such a prominent corporation give them the "no confidence" vote. It would be like the USA leaving the United Nations (note that the predecessor League of Nations failed since USA refused to sign up). So the Green Electronics Council folded.

 

While the public written statements make it sound like Apple's fault, the aforementioned quotes point to something that happened behind the scenes.

 

It is likely that the Green Electronics Council blinked.

Maybe, but I don't buy this version of events. For one thing, Apple took a PR hit. For another the Green Electronics Council would have gone out of its way to accommodate Apple anyway. There is absolutely no reason to believe they were being intransigent with Apple.

I think Apple simply saw EPEAT as a bureaucratic requirement and failed to understand the value of it as a signal of intent to environmentally conscious consumers.

I think this was all planned.  It raised huge press about a rating system that does not rate important things.  I bet the EPEAT people came to Apple and said lets see if we can work something out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjourni 

Epic fail there Apple. It was pretty obvious they were going to have to rethink this, rather then lose all government sales. Someone seriously dropped the ball.

How many of those sales were looking at computers versus iPhones and iPads which aren't EPEAT certified because they don't qualify for standard (which only counts actual computers). All those companies, schools etc can buy all the iOS stuff they like and that seems to be the trend anyway. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 

It's unfortunate that Apple is bowing to the asshats and chuckleheads from the usual snowflake that has become an avalanche.

"Asshats" & "Chuckleheads" - Are you feeling ok? lol.

Clearly Apple must have had calls from some of their biggest customers and they could see a big sales hit coming down the line. That's not "bowing" - it's sensible management.

Makes sense to re-instate EPEAT for the vast majority of products that comply. As far as I know it's only the MBP Retina that doesn't comply.

At least they can continue to sell the non-Retina MBPs to these organisations while they lobby the standards body to modify their requirements.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoXoM 

Does this mean Apple are going to have to compromise on some of their future product designs to accommodate for this backtracking?

 

Oh well, at least Greenpeace will be happier now...

I know it's popular to hate Greenpeace and their tactics can be annoying (intentionally I'm sure) but it's good to have some 'watchdogs' bearing witness and raising awareness. If not for Greenpeace the ozone layer would be gone, the whales would be gone, your kids toys would be made from toxic plastic and the French would still be dumping 50 gallon drums of radioactive waste into the ocean. I'm all for capitalism (I'm a business owner myself) but you can't just destroy everything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alonso Perez 

 

Maybe, but I don't buy this version of events. For one thing, Apple took a PR hit. For another the Green Electronics Council would have gone out of its way to accommodate Apple anyway. There is absolutely no reason to believe they were being intransigent with Apple.

 

I think Apple simply saw EPEAT as a bureaucratic requirement and failed to understand the value of it as a signal of intent to environmentally conscious consumers.

Are you kidding? Apple was one of the most instrumentally involved companies in setting up the original EPEAT. They were one of the primary drivers.

And based on Mansfield's and Frisbee's quotes, it appears that Apple will have an even louder voice in how EPEAT evolves.

Bullshit. Apple should have stuck to its horses. If Apple backpedalled and gave in everytime one of its decisions causes an outrage (ie. every single decision its ever made) it would not be a SHRED of the company it is today. If Apple withdrew from EPEAT, they must have known it would cause some bad PR, and they must have believed the reasons behind the decisions outweighed that. To give in to the temporary, bullshit, contrived outrage from people who probably dont have a clue about what EPEAT actually is, or how outdated the guidelines are, is a mistake. HIstory has shown that Apple is usually right, and the critics are all wrong. I doubt this time was an exception, but Apple buckled. Unfortunately.   

Quote:

Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 

Here are the most interesting statements by both sides:

 

and

 

 

 

 

This alludes to some sort of power struggle between Apple Inc. and the Green Electronics Council.

 

Let's say Apple approaches the Green Electronics Council proposing changes to EPEAT, perhaps some that would disqualify some products from its competitors. Perhaps there was an uproar by others in the industry and the Council voted down on Apple's proposed changes to EPEAT.

 

Or what if it were something like "let's use EPEAT on smartphones and tablets" (the EPEAT standard is so old, neither product category is covered). If other smartphone manufacturers weren't ready for EPEAT, do you think they'd be willing to proceed?

 

So, then Apple called the Green Electronics Council's bluff by walking away. While the public and media scratched their heads at Apple's actions, the Green Electronics Council probably realized that they couldn't have such a prominent corporation give them the "no confidence" vote. It would be like the USA leaving the United Nations (note that the predecessor League of Nations failed since USA refused to sign up). So the Green Electronics Council folded.

 

While the public written statements make it sound like Apple's fault, the aforementioned quotes point to something that happened behind the scenes.

 

It is likely that the Green Electronics Council blinked.

 

As a matter of fact, Apple probably knew from the beginning that it would end up like this and that they would need some sort of scapegoat (the outgoing Mansfield, a guy who has never really spoken for Apple on a public relations level). They could have left EPEAT last year or next year, it probably wouldn't have mattered. My guess is that they had this planned for a while, and the idea was probably Steve's. They just needed the right opportunity.

 

This whole thing smacks of a Steve Jobs power play.

I like your explanation.  Makes a lot of sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by charlituna 

 

well if they are going to change the glue why not stop using it all together. And stop using the torque screws that are the other part of the issue. 

 

A fancy screwdriver is still just a screwdriver so it should qualify as a common tool. The glue could actually be serving a number of functions such as ensuring better heat dissipation to the external case as well as allowing for smaller tolerances, less weight due to reduced chassis structure or possibly for safety to better contain the battery in the event of blowout. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alonso Perez 

 

Well, obviously doing the thinking first is better. But if you didn't, or didn't do it right, better to face as soon as you realize it than to stay the course at all costs.

Exactly right.  This isn't a "massive fail" or "epic fail" as others have posted.  This is a rather ho-hum, "Apple goofed, learned quickly, and corrected course."

Obviously it's weird (since many of us here were asking "just because some of your products don't mean the standard, what's the point of pulling already-approved items from the list?"), but it's hard to get too excited about it.

Apple had PLENTY of communication/messaging gaffes during the Jobs era and was (probably/generally) slower to correct course.  I think this new development is (if anything) positive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 


I checked that PDF out when the news arrived they were withdrawing from EPEAT and it didn't mention EPEAT. In the PDF inspector, it says that file's creation date is July 12th yet is listed online as a June 2012 PDF. It looks like they updated it yesterday with the EPEAT certification.
Very odd of them to drop a certification in the first place if they pass all the checks. I could understand if they got a lower rating on one product so perhaps they did get a lower rating on the Retina MBP and Apple decided to scrap it but the certifying body overturned the decision after Apple decided to drop EPEAT.

The plot thickens...

As to "Why was it Bob Mansfield and not Cook or Ives?" Duh.  The Senior Vice President for Hardware Engineering sounds like exactly the right person to make an announcement like this.  It's not going to be Ives; he's got NOTHING to do with this.  And why escalate it to the big boss?  This is a tempest in a teapot and no sense making it even more high-profile be attaching Cook's name to it.  And if it wasn't Mansfield decision to pursue this in the first place (and therefore his "mistake" to correct) then something's wrong.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jragosta 


Sure looks like it.
Maybe it was simply a mistake like Apple said.
Or maybe they're firing a shot across EPEAT's bow to get them to listen to Apple's ideas.
Exactly. If EPEAT is making a big deal out of 5-lobed screws and glued batteries, they're living in a strange world. Furthermore, it's about time that environmental groups pay more attention to results than buzzwords - and Apple's results are miles ahead of anyone else.

I doubt repair-ability and recycle-ability are the same thing in EPEAT's eyes. If the glass in the iMac, rMBP, iPad, iPhone can't be removed without shattering, that's a problem. If the batteries can't be removed without breaking their contents, that's a problem. However choice of screws is non-issue, since it's trivial to buy screw drivers. 

Where I question design over function is the the battery had to be glued in the first place, is it so that the batteries can expand in high heat without exploding, or is there just not enough clearance to be able to screw the batteries down? Are the screws effectively useless due to not having enough depth?

As far as repairing something goes, yes the rMBP has a low repairability score... does that matter to anyone who is going to buy it? Nope. The only parts that ever really wear in a laptop are the spinning hard drive (which the rMBP doesn't have) and cracking the screen (Which is caused by uneven force in opening/closing the laptop or damage caused by dropping the laptop, or something on the laptop (eg stepping on it.) Laptops also tend to burn out CFL inverters, but if it's LED lit, then that doesn't apply either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by krabbelen 

And Godwins Law makes an early appearance. ;) Post 17.

"Godwins Law" is stupid and childish.  Why do you care?  Why should anyone care?  

When you are talking about machismo, domination, totalitarian attitudes, etc. it's actually quite sensible for Hitler and nazi Germany to come up.  It's the most famous totalitarian state in recent memory and the most famous dictator.  How this idiotic observation continues to have the legs it does I will never understand.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 


There move was strategic. Because future Macs will not meet the current EPEAT standards for certification it would look worse to have only their old machines with the high rating. It's unfortunate that Apple is bowing to the asshats and chuckleheads from the usual snowflake that has become an avalanche.

I think Apple wanted to send a message to the guys at EPEAT.  Even the new "CEO" has said their standards are outdated and need to be reviewed and updated.  While I don't think Apple has a think-tank department that does nothing but think of ways to send subliminal messages to standards-bodies, I think in the end EPEAT will get their act together and modernize the way they certify products.

I mean really, all the drama-queens raising a stink about gluing the battery as opposed to using screws will conveniently disappear again when Apple gets the new rMBP's certified.

Personally, I think gluing the battery is a great idea.  The old-school guy in me obviously prefers screws, but to me it makes sense since adhesives are used in such high-strength applications (like automotive subframes) to make a structure super-rigid, that gluing the battery in makes the entire structure that much more solid.  If I want to remove the battery, a sharp spatula-like tool will certainly do the trick.  Just about every notebook consumer will NEVER replace the battery in their laptop, they will NEVER upgrade the RAM or hard drive in their system either.  But hey, the iHaters, trolls, and whiners just love to get their panties in a wedgie.  

I agree with you Solips.  Absolute bunch of asshats.

Mark my words... with the industry copying Apple on everything... just wait till the other Scamsungs start gluing their batteries in and watch as no one raises a stink about them doing it... 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 

"officials are reportedly worried that with Apple backing out, other companies may follow suit, wrecking government attempts to buy environmentally friendly hardware."

That opens p speculation that Apple could have done this to force them to alter their testing/rating methods or that Apple was woefully unaware of the backlash but it affected EPEAT even more so that they asked Apple to rejoin.

I'm going with this.  Kind of a "New Coke" strategy.  They pull out, EPEAT panics and has private conversations with Apple to get them back.  Apple agrees, but only if they get to design the new standards.   Apple wins because they have now forced their competition to enact expensive design changes to maintain EPEAT certification.  A certification Apple created and already meets.

Wow, sneaky.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alonso Perez 

 

Other government bodies and institutions around the world had started making announcements that they would not buy the products or look into the issue within the next few days. There was a risk of a snowball.

 

As to the responsibility, I have no idea where this came from and who proposed the backtrack. It sure is an interesting question though.

I have to admit to some inside information on this retraction: Steve Jobs came back from the dead and was all over this unnamed guy eating his brain. He was gonna work his way up the corporate food chain unless Mansfield made a retraction.

Don't think for one minute Steve is gone because he's dead.

Sorry, I dozed a minute…had a dream where my mind, ignorant of the facts, conjured up the following:

Apple submitted the Macbook Pro for EPEAT approval & it was denied with, 'you're kidding, right?'

Apple: We have a proprietary method of recycling these things that complies with your standards, even better. 

EPEAT: Really, how does that work?

Apple:    We can't tell you, its proprietary.

EPEAT: Well, we can't' put our approval on it, unless we understand the process. We can't recycle it & anyone else can't either.

APPLE: We'll take take care of that, they will want to recycle with us, because we will provide $ incentives toward new purchase.

EPEAT: That's not good enough. We need to know & duplicate the recycling process.

APPLE: You mean you are going to declare our very green product, 'not green,' because you don't know how to do it?

EPEAT: We are an independent body, we need to do independent testing & yield independent results. People rely on us.

APPLE: You only exist because company like ours participate.

EPEAT: We exist because the people want us to exist. This isn't the first un-recyclable product that a company has argued for.

APPLE: We're not arguing, we've got a green product & you won't approve it.

EPEAT: You realize, that without our approval, You will no longer be able to get government & enterprise accounts?

APPLE: Are you threatening us, blackmailing us into revealing/publishing proprietary, confidential information?

EPEAT: No, just stating the obvious facts, lack of our EPEAT approval will cost you 30% in sales.

APPLE: The only thing that's obvious, is you forget who you are dealing with…I need to make a call….

EPEAT: Take all the time you need, we'll still be here.

APPLE:  (smiles, makes the call, then returns)

EPEAT: Well, give you better direction as to the proper way to get this approved from us, to get the official EPEAT "A-OK?"

APPLE: Actually, I got very clear direction. Effective immediately, we are pulling all of our products from EPEAT. We will be deleting all of our references to your company because at Apple, you no longer exist.

EPEAT: That's absurd, you'll be the laughingstock of the whole world.

APPLE: We doubt it. We believe that people will want our products so much, that they will drop references     to you, buy our products & EPEAT will become irrelevant, then cease to exist, all because you wouldn't approve our green product!

EPEAT: I think Apple is making a fatal error in not only financially, but how they are perceived around the  world.

APPLE: You already made the fatal error, now you enjoy watching EPEAT unravel because of your decision here today; sleep well.

EPEAT: The world will know the truth.

APPLE: What, that we recycle the green laptops? Any of your lies or spin won't touch us in the long run. Be sure to go back & tell your people what a great job you're doing & how you told Apple what they could do with their 'green laptop." I bet they give you an award.  Nice almost doing business with you.

Does this sound familiar, like anyone we know?

Update-

Apple: Um, can we talk?

EPEAT: I was expecting your call…come on over.