Jobs responds to Rotten Apple Jabs from Environmentalists

Comment #1 was referring to the days when Apple packaged its products in UPS Brown boxes. Now it uses uber-envirounfriendly bleached and painted white boxes with mega color inks all over them. Apple is all about branding. White iPods. Sexy colored iMacs. Apple is no longer the granola Birkenstock company of the early 90's. Does that mean that Apple consumers have a George Bush mentality towards the environment? Hopefully not. But we can never be sure, until Steve Jobs adopts a McDonalds paper bag/recycled paper fries container packaging strategy. "We only use [freakin nasty] lead in our eMac CRT monitors." Three cheers for Apple! Give them a Sierra Club award!!! Costs associated with environmentally-friendly packaging is cost-competitive with other alternatives... it can even be cheaper. The reasons companies opt against it is because of ignorance or features. (the same reason Ferrari hasn't created a fuel hybrid sports car... yet. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are beating speed records and will some day be cost and speed competitive with traditional engines... same is true with enviro-packaging.)

apple has no recycling policy at all here in Australia. does this mean they value the environment less here than in the countries where they do have a recycling policy ?

I wouldn't be too worried that readers think that comment number 4 is actually SJ. If you actually belive it, then you believe anything you read on the internet, 'cuz they printed it.

Don't get in a tizzy about the last comment, folks. I checked the IP logs and the email for the last comment, and it is NOT actually Steve Jobs. Just one of our OTHER regular readers. ;-)

Of course I read TUAW, how else am I going to find out when the new Powerbook G5s are coming out!?

Cost? C'mon. Apple makes great margins on its hardware, and has over $6 billion in the bank. If cost was the only driver of their business, then they wouldn't spend money on designers, and UI people, and they wouldn't be Apple. Basically, there's a sense of disappointment that Apple isn't leading the field in environmentally-friendly practices in the same way that it is in design. I agree that that's holding it to a high standard, and one which no other comparable computer company reaches, but then no other comparable computer company designs like Apple. And we're annoyed because, if Apple did it, other people would be likely to follow suit. We think that Apple can afford to do it, and that if they did, the world would be a significantly better place.

The gall of Steve-- I used to take my children to shareholder meetings but no more! And I don't understand why Apple is not making Flintstonesque computers made of wood, bone (naturally harvested from already dead animals), and talking birds... Come on, they are *trendsetters* for crying out loud! "SquawK! It's a living"

I'm all for being more environmentaly aware. But I think something we need to remember is that Apple is first and foremost a buisiness and their first concern is money. Would "soy based inks on recycled cardboard with biodegradable filler" be truly cost effective for them? (I'm not being snide here, I really don't know the cost difference.) And if there is a noticable cost difference, would the consumer be willing to shell out the extra cash when there is no difference in the product they are purchasing? I think most of us would appreciate less waste or more biodegradble/recycled materials, but would the majority of consumers understand the extra cost they are paying when the price on their new Mini or G5 or iMac goes up but the hardware itself doesn't change? I don't think they would. And on the other hand, how much of a decrease in price might they achieve by swiching to better packaging? Would it make a big enough difference right now for a company to justify the cost of what is essentially a rather large change? Apple, among other's, should come up with more environmentaly friendly products and technologies, but I don't expect them to to put the company in jepordy trying to do it. I for one would hate to see Apple struggle financially because they are putting too much focus on something that may not be wise in a buisiness sense. Apple should be a responsible buisiness and look into these things, but they should also be a responsible buisiness with an eye on the bottom line. And whether or not we like the way capitalism works, we do live in a society that bases it's buisiness ventures on how much money may be lost or gained on any given change. We need to encourage Apple to look into these things, but we need to be understanding if now is not the right time.

Apple was more responsable last century (aka last decade). Post iMac, their packaging has become so bloated its drunk. I realise many if not most love it (unwrap), but I expect things like soy based inks printed on recycled cardboard with biodegradable filler (for my childrens childrens children). Also, I want more green technology. Why don't they focus on pioneering things like solar/hybrid portable casings rather than the double bouble plastic mouse? Don't get me wrong, I love Apple. And Steve, the reason that your company is being singled out (if that is what is happening) is probably because a lot of people see Apple as being the trend setter (which it is). Think Different, corporate citizenship, socially responsible business... why not?