
Apple is back on EPEAT - kellysutton
http://www.apple.com/environment/letter-to-customers/
======
droithomme
"All eligible products" is a key, the new iPad with its glued in battery is
not among them.

The "more efficient and longer lasting" case materials he brags about are
irrelevant in their disposable products made of low quality components that
are not user serviceable or upgradable.

It's like bragging you made your automobile frame out of solid titanium with a
carbon fiber shell, but ignoring the fact that you built the engine without
any way to change the oil, so you're going to be throwing it out or sending it
in for major costly service after a short time. Such planned obsolescent
designs are certainly not environmentally sound, and claims of the longevity
and strength of the frame materials, and even of certifications, are just PR
to distract and hypnotize the marketplace into believing the opposite of the
reality of the situation.

~~~
pooriaazimi
Not being user-servicable does not mean it's disposable. You can take it to
Apple Stores and they'll fix it for you _(and they certainly don't tuck the
entire thing in the trash, they probably have some complex machines (that not
everyone has) that are able to de-glue screen/battery and case)_.

It's a compromise most regular customers will probably accept.

And I don't get ""disposable products made of low quality components"" at all.
Low quality?!

~~~
kalleboo
But you can't upgrade them. I just added 4 GB of RAM and an SSD to my mom's
4-year-old MBP, ensuring it'll last another 3-4 years. 2 GB RAM and a 5400rpm
drive just wasn't cutting it anymore. Several of my friends extended the lives
of their MacBooks by replacing the DVD with a secondary SSD.

Apple's new generation design of Macs have soldered-in RAM and a proprietary
disk. Will we be able to upgrade them in 4 years?

edit: Imagine if you could upgrade the RAM in an iPad. I could still have used
my original iPad now instead of it being junk.

~~~
larrydavid
Not true, only the Retina Macbook Pro and Airs have soldered-in batteries/RAM,
just like ultrabooks made by other manufacturers (ASUS, Dell, Acer).

It's a design decision. If you want an ultra thin/light machine then you have
to compromise. If servicing the machine yourself is an issue then buy one of
the 'regular' Macbooks.

~~~
mitjak
Something's telling me the 'regular' MacBooks won't be around for very much
longer.

~~~
CamperBob2
Then the market will have spoken.

------
younata
The retina macbook is rated EPEAT gold.

<http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs/>

~~~
glhaynes
Interesting! Unless I'm misunderstanding a subtlety here, the common wisdom
seemed to be that the retina MacBook's glue made it ineligible to get EPEAT
certification and, since that style of design is obviously Apple's future
direction, they pulled their EPEAT participation now.

~~~
mkaltenecker
I think many people misunderstand where the glue is in the Retina MacBook Pro.
They say things like “The display is glued to the case.” which is wrong.

The display assembly (the actual screen where the lights shine true) is glued
together. I’m not sure but I think that part of the display is always pretty
tightly integrated, probably even glued together. (I tried to find information
on that and I would be very glad if someone could point me to resources about
how laptop displays are usually built.)

The difference with Apple’s design (as far as I understand it) is that the
frontmost layer of that assembly is also the front glass of the screen. Other
laptops with glass in front of the screen put an extra layer of glass in front
of the display assembly. The Retina MacBook Pro doesn’t have that extra glass.
(My understanding – but please correct me if I’m wrong, I’m really not sure
and I would like to know more – is that old displays had a sort of plastic
outer layer, now Apple uses a glass outer layer. But that’s not that a big
deal, as far as I know, since on the inside all LCDs use glass substrate also
– so it’s not as if Apple introduced glass into the display assembly, some was
always there, they just added more. But maybe I’m wrong about that.)

That display assembly is screwed – not glued – to the case. Behind it are the
LEDs and light diffusers.

Here is a teardown of the display: [http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/MacBook-
Pro-15-Inch-Retina-Di...](http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/MacBook-Pro-15-Inch-
Retina-Display-Teardown/9493/1#.T-B6X6DrlaR)

The battery is glued to the case - but it seems to that it is eminently
removable with the application of some force. If you don’t care about breaking
the laptop (since you want to recycle it) that should be no big deal. I mean,
Apple replaces the battery for $200, no questions asked. I don’t think they
replace the whole Retina MacBook Pro every time they do that, so they must
remove the glued-in battery, and that inside a working laptop. If Apple can do
it, so can you (especially with a laptop that’s beyond repair).

~~~
keenerd
> I mean, Apple replaces the battery for $200, no questions asked. I don’t
> think they replace the whole Retina MacBook Pro every time they do that.

I'd like to point out that no one has had a RMBP serviced yet, so everything
you've said is entirely speculation. As is the following:

They will replace the entire RMBP.

The only user customizable part is the data on the SSD. Why go to all the
trouble of taking the laptop apart when Apple could just move the data and
give you a new one? Much faster turn around time. (And fixes any other
dings/dents. Yay Apple!) It will be interesting to see how they deal with
unorthodox customization, such as stickers on the exterior of the case.
Probably will separate those out and give them the special full service
treatment.

After they ship you your new laptop, they will take apart the old one and
unglue the battery - but only so the unit can be resold (as refurbished) as
part of a student discount service.

They probably won't even take apart the laptop and swap the SSD - just dd the
whole thing over their fast little thunderbolt port. In theory, they could
offer battery replacements in the Apple Store - the sales rep just has to
connect the two laptops, start the sync and wait 3.5 minutes. No skilled labor
involved.

From a bottom line perspective, this makes too much sense not to happen.
They'll be making money on every step of the process and the majority of
customers will love it.

~~~
mkaltenecker
So you completely agree that it's possible to replace the battery in a working
rMBP and that it is not in any way permanently affixed to the case? The rest
are irrelevant (for the purpose of this discussion) implementation details.

Yay!

~~~
keenerd
No, I think they will replace the aluminum case and the battery as a single
unit.

~~~
mkaltenecker
But why the hell should that be the case? Look at iFixit’s teardown. It didn’t
look at all like the battery was firmly glued in.

------
derwildemomo
"I recognize that this was a mistake." strikes me as a very un-appleish
communication style.

~~~
alpine
I agree. Worryingly, it could be evidence of a move away from traditional
Steve values, ie don't back down (straight away), don't apologise, don't
explain. Alternatively, it could be Apple realise they made a _huge_ mistake,
were about to see immense damage to the brand and/or sales, so have taken the
drastic, ajobsian action they think is required.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Recognizing a huge mistake is one thing. It was the publicly admitting it that
is un-Apple. They could have just silently stayed the course for awhile before
announcing they had changed they're mind.

~~~
alpine
That's exactly what Steve would have done.

~~~
dsrguru
Yup. My first-gen white MacBook back in 2006 was one of the ones afflicted by
the random shutdown issue (<http://support.apple.com/kb/TS1599>). It took over
a year iirc of local Apple stores blindly trying heat sink and logic board
replacements before central management publicly acknowledged that an issue
existed and promptly released a firmware upgrade to turn the fans on. Problem
resolved.

------
unreal37
"Apple makes the most environmentally responsible products in our industry."

How is this possibly true? Nothing Apple makes can be easily opened, upgraded,
or have their batteries replaced. They are made to be obsolete in 2-3 years.

When my iPad screen cracked, they made me buy a new one (at discount) instead
of fixing it. I doubt they even fixed the old one I gave to them - just
discarded it. How is that environmentally friendly?

I own almost everything Apple makes. But they need to better explain how
built-in obsolescence and impossible-to-fix devices equates to environmentally
friendly.

~~~
wtallis
Pretty much everything Apple makes is obsolete within a year, but that's not
due to Apple's design choices, it's due to technological progress. What you're
trying to say is that Apple's products are garbage in 2-3 years, but that's
obviously not true - other than batteries (which to my knowledge can all be
replaced for a fee at the very least), all Apple products can be expected to
have useful lifetimes in excess of 5 years.

As for your cracked iPad screen, just because Apple may not have refurbished
it in the way _you_ think they should have does not mean it ended up in a
landfill. It's quite possible that it's cheaper for them to recycle the case
and logic board than to re-validate the machine after putting a new screen on
it.

~~~
bdcravens
I don't know of a single product Apple makes that's obsolete in a year:
obsolete doesn't mean "doesn't have latest and greatest features". 3GS phones
run pretty much all the apps a 4S runs; ditto on the original iPad compared to
a new one.

------
schiffern
Things that everyone seems to be forgetting

* Apple makes thin, light, durable products. Reduce > Recycle.

* Raw materials are a small amount of the embodied energy in electronics. The microchips themselves constitute many times the embodied energy. Again, reduce > recycle.

* As others have pointed out, Apple didn't do this because any of their newly-released products weren't eligible.

Putting it all together, Apple did this to send a message to EPEAT:
"Disassembly isn't the end-all be-all of green." Looks like EPEAT caved.

------
swilliams
One interesting thing to note is that this is from Bob Mansfield, and not Tim
Cook. When Jobs was CEO, I don't remember a subordinate ever releasing
something like this.

~~~
smackfu
They announced his retirement a few weeks ago too.

[http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/28/svp-of-hardware-
engineer...](http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/28/svp-of-hardware-engineer-bob-
mansfield-to-retire/)

------
dannyr
When Apple decided to leave EPEAT, Apple Apologists/Fanboys said it's because
EPEAT is outdated.

I wonder how they are going to spin this one.

~~~
georgespencer
"[Brand] Apologist" and "[Brand] Fanboy" are the kind of ridiculous, loaded
terms which shouldn't appear anywhere on a site like HN. When people praise
Apple it's not because they're fanboys. When people criticise Apple it's not
because they hate everything Apple does with a passion.

EPEAT _is_ outdated. Horribly outdated. By EPEAT's own admission.

Apple made a mistake by opting out of it rather than working with EPEAT to try
to improve it. I think that's what they are doing now.

~~~
mun2mun
So you are saying that putting a laptop in a shredder after removing the toxic
battery easily is an outdated recycling practice?

------
digitalengineer
"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"

Reads to me like EPEAT is moving (a bit) in Apple's direction with the new
future IEEE-standards.

------
hollerith
One datapoint:

Almost all power cords and extension cords in the US contain lead: the lead is
added to the plastic part of the cord when the plastic is still "molten" and
its purpose is to make the plastic less flammable.

Although I did not do a chemical assay on it or anything, I am pretty sure
that the power cord Apple included with my 2011 Mac mini contains no lead.
(The cord has a different, more rubbery feel to it that strongly suggests a
completely different material, and I might have seen a claim to that effect
somewhere on the web.)

------
rabidonrails
I'm a bit thrown by the overall tone of this announcement. I'll totally on
board that Apple is doing its best to make "green" products and, apparently
they're leading the way - great!

But if it's all true, why did they pull the products from EPEAT at all?

------
mtgx
But does this mean their products will now be more recyclable and whatnot? Or
it just means they put their EPEAT badge on the site again, although their new
devices are still not as compliant as they used to be before?

~~~
PedroCandeias
I don't think their products changed much in a couple of days. Some are still
EPEAT compliant, some are not, just like last week.

~~~
sigzero
Though the last paragraph is interesting that there relationship is now
"stronger". I wonder if Apple was just using this to say "See, it needs
updating."

Who knows....not I.

~~~
spiralpolitik
Apple realized that they needed EPEAT because some (vocal) customers cared
about it.

EPEAT realized that they needed Apple on board to make their certification
meaningful.

And thus an understanding was formed...

------
recursive
What a coincidence! It just so happens that EPEAT is now relevant again!

~~~
sambe
The entire thrust of their response - perhaps even half of the text - is that
EPEAT remains outdated. So not really, no.

------
tscrib
Glad to see that Apple is listening to customer feedback _and_ acting on it.

------
guscost
Well, I have less respect for Apple now, and still none for Greenpeace.

------
abcd_f
> _Signed_ Bob

A middle finger, the Apple way.

------
mkaltenecker
I’m thinking about whether this is an atypical reaction by Apple and I think
it’s not but I’m not sure.

The pattern is typical – more or less. Some criticism appears. Apple is dead
silent for a few days. Apple has a comprehensive response to the criticism.
(Alternative that also happens frequently: Apple doesn’t ever mention the
criticism.) That’s what used to happen in the past, that’s what nearly
happened here.

The difference is that they responded with a different message pretty quickly
after the criticism (arguing that EPAT isn’t such a great certification) so
it’s not true that they staid completely silent.

When it comes to the message itself, I don’t think it’s that atypical. Apple
rarely responds to criticism, so there are few situations we can use to
compare. It’s not as big a deal as Atennagate – so they picked a less involved
way to respond (basically a press release instead of a press conference) – but
in every other respect it’s pretty similar.

This time there is a clearer Mea Culpa but the undertone is still that EPAT is
a bad certification. (During the Antennagate press conference the undertone
was that it’s not really that big of a deal – and it was a much more obvious
undertone.) The tradition of Apple execs writing letters is also continued.

I would only say that Steve’s letters tended to be more about presenting
arguments. That has certainly something to do with the different purposes
(explain why DRM/Flash are bad vs. admit that you were wrong and reverse
direction) but I still would have preferred if Bob Mansfield had explained
more of Apple’s reasoning.

~~~
st3fan
"Apple is dead silent for a few days." - Why is this special or even worth
mentioning? You expect a multi-billion dollar company with 20K employees to
discuss something like that happily in a public forum or so?

~~~
gnaffle
Most companies have "damage control" (PR) departments that move very quickly
to respond to and contain any criticism before a story explodes.

------
hell0_th3r3
geez apple, get it together. i was mildly impressed by tim cook when he took
over, but now i'm getting the impression that he is apple's steve ballmer.
this was a ridiculous and trivially preventable gaff.

