
More answers to your questions about Apple and the environment - doener
http://www.apple.com/environment/answers/
======
peteretep
I feel like there's at least one PR own-goal here. Consider:

    
    
        > > Do Apple products contain lead?
        > Apple is in compliance with the European
        > Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) 
        > Directive, which restricts the use of lead and
        > other substances. As a result of our precautionary
        > approach to substances, Apple phased out lead in
        > plastic parts, paint, and packaging material long
        > before lead’s use was restricted
    

So that's pretty clearly a "Yes", covered up to look like a "No", and if
they're employing weasel words _there_ , where it looks like they're probably
doing a good job, who knows what actual bad things they're covering up?

Couldn't they have led that paragraph with "Yes, trace amounts", before
explaining their reduction program? By not doing so they've made all their
answers seem less trust worthy.

~~~
yongjik
You vastly overestimate how well most people can assess potentially harmful
materials.

Apple answers this with "Yes, trace amounts", and the next buzzfeed article
will scream "Apple admits that its product contains lead! What else does it
have?" And it will go downhill from there...

~~~
fabulist
I don't accept this as valid, but even if I did there are still more honest
ways to spin this than to bury the lede completely.

~~~
karmelapple
Example of the more honest way? Everything in what you posted is honest, and
that is a well accepted standard for keeping low-to-no lead levels.

~~~
fabulist
We understands your concerns about heavy metals and have nearly eliminated
lead from our products. <insert the rest of their comments>

------
stinos
Reading just that title I expected something along the lines of 'we're
actively researching how to make our product line and/or production process
less harmful for the planet and this gets better with every iteration of our
iDevice'. Instead it's bascially a bunch of PR saying they comply with
standards/guidelines (some of which they wrote themselves). Don't get me
wrong, it's not bad, but eventually companies with the potential Apple has
could really turn around how the majority of people think about the
environment: currently, the majority doesn't seem to care a lot. If companies
like Apple/Samsung/..., who're serving that majority, however would start
pushing 'greener' and/or 'more fair' devices and explaining why, than the
majority would get dragged along and maybe start to care, the rest of the
industry would have to follow, etc.

------
xiphias
Are these really frequently asked questions? I'm more interested in
environmental and working conditions of FoxConn.

Or: what is the biggest environmental problem that Apple is facing right now?

------
cpeterso
An earlier version of this page used the name "MacOS", fueling earlier rumors
that Apple will rename OS X 11.12 to "MacOS":

[http://9to5mac.com/2016/04/14/macos-name-change-
apple/](http://9to5mac.com/2016/04/14/macos-name-change-apple/)

------
iammyIP
It's interesting how the PR machines at both Apple and Microsoft apparently
are recently running quite hot to diffuse any further emotionally grave
discussion of concerns regarding their low-level-builtin 'security' holes in
their products in the name of constant surveillance.

