What is Digg?137 Comments
- r3zonance, on 10/12/2007, -17/+195No NOT finally. If you actually read the Apple press release they have been doing most of the environmental green stuff already (and better than some of the other PC manufacturers). There are a couple of new things in the pipeline, but most of it they were already doing.
Greenpeace are just idiots, claiming it as a victory and "something they fought for". When it is blatantly obvious that most of what they wanted was already being done, and Greenpeace just didn't want to hear it. - ryanobjc, on 10/12/2007, -8/+115Props to Apple.
However, no props to Greenpeace, in fact, boo on them. If you read Steve Job's letter, it is quite apparent that the letter is NOT a "change in policy" as per Greenpeace's statement. It is just a clarification and statement of existing plans, products and processes.
Greenpeace, you guys suck. - roosterjm2k2, on 10/12/2007, -37/+142Totally :)
Now if they can just figure out how to cut back on Ego and Overconfidence Emissions, we'd be set.
I kid, I kid...i love you Mac kids...you make the world pretty with your art...rock on! - wild, on 10/12/2007, -0/+90"I always try to keep politics and common sense separate."
So does our government. ;-) - ubuntuedgy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+45I always try to keep politics and common sense separate. Apple is trying to benefit the environment. That is a good thing and I appreciate it, as should everyone. Whether you are liberal or conservative, or anywhere within the "labeled" spectrum, we have an obligation to use common sense and try to reduce the chemicals we add to our environment in waste products.
I consider myself fairly conservative (who usually get bad marks on conservation...at least in the media), but I am not so stubborn that I see the need to protect our environment as much as possible. I recycle, everything I can, as best as I can. Luckily I have a recycling station about a mile from my house. Glass, plastic, oil, yard waste, etc. I am not perfect, but I try to do my part. This isn't about politics, its about common sense.
Two thumbs up for Apple. They deserve the right to brag about it. Good for them. - samuelcotterall, on 10/12/2007, -4/+44Apple have been doing their bit to help recycling for the last 30 years by making computers that no one wants to throw out.
- epilonious, on 10/12/2007, -23/+56"Greenpeace are just idiots, claiming it as a victory and 'something they fought for'. When it is blatantly obvious that most of what they wanted was already being done, and Greenpeace just didn't want to hear it."
That's pretty much the case with 93% of all diggers/posters/gamers/internet-sites/people. - maharaj, on 10/12/2007, -3/+29Yes, it is true. This is Greenpeace spin. I used to be a strong supporter of Greenpeace until I found that some of their practices are shady. Their goal is noble, but how they achieve it is often times questionable. The "Green My Apple" campaign was a ploy from the beginning to get Greenpeace more attention. They capitalized on the success of Apple. They knew that Apple had better "green" initiatives than most of the other computer manufacturers, but chose to pick on them for to get more publicity. They have been staging demonstrations across the globe in front of Apple stores, when there are far worse offenders out there. This article makes it seem as if Apple is "changing their policy" for Greenpeace. This is not the case, Apple is referring to changing the way that they communicate with customers regarding their green policies (they are typically secretive-sometimes to the point of their own detriment). They have been and will continue to focus on "greening" their practices.
- microbreak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26Yes, the ONLY change in their policy is that they will be openly (or relatively openly) discussing their current achievements and future goals in the challenge of becoming more environmentally responsible. What they have done and what they are planning on doing has not been swayed by Greenpeace, it was planned by Apple independently prior to Greenpeace.
- MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22What I found amusing about the "Green my Apple" Greenpeace campaign was some of the tactics they used. Oh, not there nonsense on their website, most people who saw it were already believers and it wasn't going to influence them one way or another. What I mean is some of there "street" tactics.
Example: At the Macworld convention last January, they set up a big inflated Apple just outside the main Moscone Center (North?) where the bulk of people were heading to. No big deal right? Well, what they were using to keep this thing inflated was a gas generator powering an air pump. So, here's Greenpeace belching out gas fumes to protest a company's environmental policies.
That first evening they also set up in front of the nearby Apple Store with a scaffolding holding up a green-tinted spotlight shining on the Apple logo outside the store. Again, no big deal except they were using (yet again) a gasoline generator to power the spotlight.
I won't even mention (wait, I just did) all the trees killed to make those pamphlets that hardly anyone I saw bother to read. I guess Greenpeace is more a "do as I say, not as I do" kind of organization. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19you guys are very dumb!
- eccoombe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15where's my shovel?
- dvgraphics, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Way to cherry-pick Steve's letter, Greenpeace. You've proven quite good at that.
- pjwhite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12@dawgdaze
I am just going to clarify that your idea that recycling takes more energy than new materials is false almost all the time.
See this page on recycling efficiencies: http://www.earth911.org/master.asp?s=lib&a=energy/EnergyFacts.html
"Recycled aluminum saves 95% energy vs. virgin aluminum; recycling of one aluminum can saves enough energy to run a TV for 3 hours"
"Recycled glass saves 50% energy vs. virgin glass (Center for Ecological Technology); recycling of one glass container saves enough energy to light a 100-watt bulb for 4 hours"
"Over a ton of resources is saved for every ton of glass recycled -- 1,330 pounds of sand, 433 pounds of soda ash, 433 pounds of limestone, and 151 pounds of feldspar. Also a ton of glass produced from raw materials creates 384 pounds of mining waste. Using 50% recycled glass cuts the waste by 75%."
"According to the EPA, recycling a pound of PET(plastic) saves approximately 12,000 BTU's."
"Production of recycled paper uses 80% less water, 65% less energy and produces 95% less air pollution than virgin paper production." - djdole, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13@jaycliche
Don't confuse your MAC hardware with your OSX operating system.
With Bootcamp, Mac users can be Vista users too. The mud you try to sling at any MSOS or Linux distro is just as much slung at Mac users too.
So remember that no OS is perfect and play nice! - wixer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"In one environmental group’s recent scorecard, Dell, HP and Lenovo all scored higher than Apple because of their plans (or “plans for releasing plans” in the case of HP). In reality, Apple is ahead of all of these companies in eliminating toxic chemicals from its products."
- pmuse, on 10/12/2007, -14/+22Hmm, I really doubt Apple bowed down to a worthless organization run by emo, 20-something, upper-middle-class, self-righteous pricks.
All of the money Greenpeace gets doesn't go toward affecting change, but feeding the Greenpeace machine / ad campaigns. Only an idiot supports them.
Environmentalism is a cult for elitist pricks. - inactive, on 10/15/2007, -1/+8"environmentalism" is actually just a shorthand way of saying "it's bad to ***** where you eat."
- opticsnake, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8The actual article from Apple:
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple/ - unloud, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Go Apple! Greenpeace can go to hell.
- winnch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8They're not full of *****. This was obviously one product out of hundreds that missed certain requirements and had to be improved. Since then, Apple has been phasing out this product altogether.
- hoshiku, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12You totally missed the point of the "change in policy" statement. Apple is changing it's policy of not disclosing the good things it does behind the scenes to the public. Apple's products (if not their customer service) stand on their own without any need to brag about them. It is unsurprising that Apple Computer was already ahead of all other corporations in terms of environmental friendliness. It is disheartening that Greenpeace launched a campaign like this without fully researching facts and it's even more disheartening that instead of owning up to their mistake they shout 'Victory!'
- kittynipples, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Now they can get back to the really important things... like chasing after whaling ships.
- sagefool1975, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It's big news because Greenpeace gave Apple tons of ***** and bad press over how non-environmental they were, when in fact Apple was simply not disclosing their policy. Now that Apple has disclosed their policy it shows that Greenpeace's media ***** over this was in fact the crap (not to say that Apple isn't putting the best spin possible what they do, but still.) And ironically it is Greenpeace claiming total victory for changing Apple. I think if Greenpeace wasn't quite so arrogant in their reply this wouldn't really be huge news. Maybe they should have said something along the lines of "Great, thanks for telling us that, here is your new better ranking. Sorry for being such dicks about this, but you really weren't giving anyone any info and we think the consumer needs this info available so they can make informed decisions. If this experience made you rethink or update any internal policies before telling the public, that's cool, if not - well, wow, you guys really are on the ball. (But hey, we couldn't know that till you told us)" Which is a bit suck-uppy I know. Anyway, it's all just politics.
- Zzone, on 10/12/2007, -10/+16***** greenpeace
- joe2100, on 10/12/2007, -10/+16Stupid greenpeace hippies. Get a real job!!!
- Spuy767, on 10/12/2007, -9/+14The main reason that Apple computers always have been, and most likely always will be, 'greener' than Windows PC's is that they haven't based their entire busines model on the disposability of their products. An Apple machine is likely to have thrice the useful lifespan of a Windows PC. Couple that with the fact that, upon replacement, most Apple machines are either kept, or donated, and you have a huge difference in the environmental impact of a computer.
- shadowpr0ph3t, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7"Apple has declared a phase out of the worst chemicals in its product range, Brominated Fire Retardants (BFRs) and Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) by 2008. Previously they put no date on this pledge so now lets see if they beat competitors like Dell to this goal."
How is that a new thing? They state they have been doing it for the last 12 years. - mikes1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Their statement did not cover lead, and the iSight likely used lead based solder.
- pmuse, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Good thing you included the sarcasm tag. I would say that people are as little conscious about the environment as they were 30 years ago, if not less.
IF there has been any change lately, it is due to global warming, not Greenpeace driving their boats around and behaving like extremist jackasses. - NSResponder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Why all the Greenpeace hate?"
There is a considerable disparity between what Greenpeace claims they're all about, and what they actually do, which is to suck up donation money that would otherwise go to real environmental groups.
-jcr - FastZ, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Granny Smith FTW!
- jakdracula, on 10/15/2007, -2/+6I've been recycling my old email for years.
- NSResponder, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6" I used to be a strong supporter of Greenpeace until I found that some of their practices are shady."
I gave up on Greenpeace right after high school, when several friends of mine worked for them in DC and Boston. They got out quick, once they understood what a corrosive work environment it was.
-jcr - plnegative1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This makes me a little more interested in Apple's products. I'm sick of companies including things that are unhealthy for people for the sake of the mighty dollar.
- JoeHeavyFlow, on 10/15/2007, -3/+7I live in Minnesota, I'm all for global warming.
- AndrewDavies, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Oh right, they were just doing nice things in secret to surprise us. :D
Good on them though for listening to customers and coming part of the way. Apple should be a leader though. - imbetterthanu, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8"Environmentalism is a cult for elitist pricks."
No kidding. You know an organization is bad when their founder (Patrick Moore), still an environmentalist, leaves the organization because he didn't like where it was headed: Too political and self-righteos. He hates what it turned into. - RealityMonster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Dugg down for Greenpeace misrepresenting themselves and Apple. This isn't the work of Greenpeace, so they should stop trying to take credit for it.
- turnlikeawheel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You have no clean water or untainted food but you have a computer and internet connection?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Screw that. I want a powerbook that runs on diesel.
- Pfhreak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Environmentalism is a cult for elitist pricks."
Correction: "GREENPEACE is a cult for elitist pricks."
I very much support environmentalism, but I wouldn't touch Greenpeace with a ten-foot pole. Those guys are irrational and propagandist, as witnessed by their whole "we won against Apple!" BS. Uh, Greenpeace, go take a reading comprehension class: Apple was already doing/planning this stuff, they just weren't talking about it, all you did was prompt them to blow their own horn more. - AngryPunk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm not a Greenpeace fan by any measure, but what about all of the collateral damage sure to be done to other species on this planet while we continue to pollute the world? Sure, the Earth will replenish herself - it's seen much harder times that we could ever imagine to put her through, and life continued. Each time that happened, however, there were mass extinctions of life on the planet. Now, extinction is a natural process, and I'm confident that someday far in the future even the human species will not be able to avoid its clutch, but the fact remains that we are most definitely responsible for the extinction and near-extinction of many species that were once found in abundance all over this planet. That said, Humans have been causing animal species to become extinct for millions of years, over hunting has been a problem as far back as the upper paleolithic era.
- NSResponder, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"t most of what they wanted was already being done,"
It's important to draw the distinction here between what GP *said* they wanted, and what they actually wanted. What they really wanted was for Apple to play along with their usual shakedown gambit.
-jcr - CrackaPleeze, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4werd. I hope that society in general doesn't get the impression that all environmentalists support Greenpeace. I'm pro-green and anti-Greenpeace, and I'm not in the minority.
- badapplestudio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Oh, as far as the LED backlighting goes... they are probably really doing it because the current backlighting is *****. Mine has gone out and been repaired 3 times. And I'm still getting a flicker now and then. The power inverters suck balls. That's why they are moving to LED. This has been a problem since the aluminum G4 PB.
- drbroccoli, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5That article sounds like it was written by a child.
- EagleRock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Interesting comments. Let's remember that environmentalism is NOT an effort to save the planet, but rather, to save ourselves. If we completely destroy the planet so that humans cannot survive on it anymore, the planet will still exist, with a different atmosphere and different forms of life. We'll be long-gone, but the planet will stay. You can make the argument, for that reason, that environmentalism is self-serving, but it's still not a bad idea to try to minimize our effect on nature.
- zmigliozzi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I wish I could have founded Greenpeace, those guys really know how to make a buck.
- ScottieB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, it's mostly spin. But there's a beautiful little nugget in there that noone is commenting on:
"To eliminate mercury in our displays, we need to transition from fluorescent lamps to light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to illuminate the displays. Fortunately, all iPod displays already use LEDs for illumination, and therefore contain no mercury. We plan to introduce our first Macs with LED backlight technology in 2007. Our ability to completely eliminate fluorescent lamps in all of our displays depends on how fast the LCD industry can transition to LED backlighting for larger displays."
Sounds like confirmation of either new imacs or macbooks/pros with led backlighting this year!
My guess is they ship when leopard finally comes out. -
Show 51 - 100 of 137 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is