

San Francisco turns its back on Apple after green registry pull-out - jhack
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/07/san-francisco-turns-its-back-on-apple-after-green-registry-pull-out/

======
crusso
And the interesting info in the article that makes this headline link-bait:

"Observers have pointed out that a tiny percentage (around 1-2 percent) of
municipal PC purchases are Macs, and the number of governments that require
100 percent EPEAT compliance is also relatively small, so the impact on
Apple's bottom line may end up being minimal."

~~~
jameshawkins
While I see the argument that this the title is link-bait, I don't think they
are necessarily trying to overstate it's significance -- how would you title
an article like this without it sounding like link-bait?

It's just showing some of the backlash to Apple's decision. It may not be a
significant percentage, but who knows what other potential purchasers may
follow suit.

~~~
_pius
"... how would you title an article like this without it sounding like link-
bait?"

Oh, I don't know, maybe by avoiding language like _San Francisco turns its
back on Apple_ ...

~~~
mistercow
That's not an answer to the question. The question was "how would you title it
if not like that?", so answering "not like that" is just begging the question.

~~~
justauser
I submitted the same subject some hours earlier and not sure that title(taken
directly from WSJ) is any better.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4224661>

------
51Cards
"...and we hope that the city saying it will not buy Apple products will make
Apple reconsider its participation"

Not sure Apple is willing to reverse their current design trend over this.
They would have to move away from 'cutting edge' designs to get back to
disassemble-able products (a requirement for the certification) My "wanna-be
eco-friendly soul" is somewhat pleased at this stance though. I think the
future disposal of a product should be a concern in the design and if it makes
it a millimeter thicker, so be it.

------
wahsd
Does anyone have any insight into what Apple's play is all about?

It has led to the Federal gov't and military to have to pull all Apple devices
from procurement and project considerations.

~~~
jonknee
Apple has calculated that design is better than ease of recycling. They have
been moving this direction for a while, but the completely non-serviceable
Retina display MacBook Pros are what likely tipped the scale.

~~~
schiffern
Right, but why _withdraw_ products that were already certified?

~~~
twoodfin
Presumably because they'd like the EPEAT standards changed, and they think the
best way to do that is to make a big show of pulling out, rather than have one
model after another fail to make the cut.

Thus they're going to find out in short order whether EPEAT is serious about
working with them on their new design directions. If they are, then great: new
standards are promulgated and Apple's back in the fold. If not, then this was
a big story for a few days in July: The Band-aid came off quick, which is
usually good PR.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
I don't know what the standards are so I can't make any sort of informed guess
about if they need to be changed or not. But why does EPEAT need to work with
Apple to amend the standards to accommodate their new design direction? Apple
chose their new design direction fully aware of the EPEAT standards. You can't
blame EPEAT for that and get mad when they don't adjust standards for you. I'm
not sure how many people really care, but it seems SF Dept. of Environment
cares.

------
qq66
Why do city workers need Macs anyways? They should be using eMachines. Good
that Apple pulled out.

~~~
jtchang
That is incredibly myopic. Almost to the point that your statement implies you
are above civil servants.

I certainly believe that some city workers would benefit greatly from macs.
And how about programmers? Web and graphic designers? Not everyone in civil
service is a case worker.

~~~
astrodust
Maybe qq66 is the kind of boss who gives you a 2004-vintage Windows XP machine
that's so full of dust you can't even tell what components are inside and
expects you to work 16-hour days on it without overtime.

~~~
qq66
If you don't need to do anything that you can't do effectively on a 2004
machine, why would you need anything more? City employees are welcome to buy
iPads and Lexuses with their own money (although it comes from my pocket, it's
theirs to dispatch as they see fit), but when it comes to spending mine, they
shouldn't have anything beyond what they need to perform their job function.

~~~
astrodust
You know what I _love_? Waiting a tiny eternity while a city employee waits
for their crappy, slow computer to load up a simple form so they can help me
with something routine.

Next time you're put on hold for that reason, remember money spent on
appropriately powerful hardware is _never_ wasted.

------
tpowell
This is not meant to be inflammatory, but in my experience Macs last twice as
long as most PCs anyways, say nothing of saving the IT department time.

I DON'T WANT the thing to come apart easily with common tools.

~~~
ajross
I think your intuition is 100% wrong, actually. PCs in cost-sensitive IT
environments (especially government ones), are routinely stretched into useful
lifespans far longer than consumer devices. It's routine to walk into a
government office and see people limping along with 6-8 year old desktops,
dusty CRT monitors with screen burn, etc... The ability to take the machines
apart and replace components is an important part of this.

~~~
pavel_lishin
I could get along with a 6-8 year old desktop, as well. The reason I don't is
because it would _suck_ , not because it would physically break down.

