Apple versus Greenpeace

My dad is 73 and has just got his first Apple. The previously beloved PC is rotting upstairs and the MAC is guest of honor in all phone conversations. It's a delight to see someone getting such genuine pleasure and even at age 73, opening a door to a new world. Academic spoiling debates are the last thing on his mind and rightly so.

Matthew said: "In answer to all of you Greenpeace haters, if the things the orgainization is saying publicly about Apple Computer are inacurrate, that's actionable.

To this point Apple hasn't sued GP that I'm aware of."

Actually, the Greenpeace report is pure subjective ranking...in other words, opinion. So, it's NOT actionable. It's irresponsible and shady, but not actionable.

In many respects, Apple has been leading the way. They were the first company to switch 100% to LCD monitors, which are far better for the environment than CRT monitors. That's just one example (an example that Greenpeace conveniently ignores, however, as it doesn't help their sensationlistic tactics.)

Thomas, you're thinking of Patrick Moore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_%28environmentalist%29) and yes, he did leave Greenpeace and is now one of its most vocal opponents.

Environmentalism is one thing. Extremism, in the vein of Greenpeace, is completely different.

In answer to all of you Greenpeace haters, if the things the orgainization is saying publicly about Apple Computer are inacurrate, that's actionable.

To this point Apple hasn't sued GP that I'm aware of.

I've said it here before, but it's our children's environment we'll be passing on. Why not uncover the facts and adopt a better-to-be-safe-than-sorry attitude.

Greenpeace is just trying to leech publicity from Apple. Apple is certainly no worse than the rest of the industry.

If by "walk the walk" you mean "no viruses, no crashes, pro-environment, pro-creativity", then yes. All those claims are backable-up.

As for subversive, counterculture, and non-conformist, who cares if Apple is or not? They give a nod to those ideals because that is their demographic, their userbase.
The question of whether Apple 'means it' or is just marketing is irrelevant and moot, because they are a company—not a person—and marketing is the total action of expressing their viewpoints.

Marketing:corporation::speech:individual.

I noted (and emailed greenpeace months ago) that while they have all kinds of links so we can spam Apple, there was no easy way on their anti-Apple pages to politely take issue with them. (Specifically they were talking about computer product lifetimes, and I've owned enough macs and pcs over the years to know that on average macs last MUCH longer--my macs get passed on, my pcs die.)

Had a bit of fun mentioning this on the Fake Steve Jobs blog... Fake Steve really had fun with this.

Honestly I think they attack Apple for the attention it gets them (and let's not be naive, attention raises $$$). The idea that Dell cares more about the environment is just preposterous.

And hey the ipod comes in green again. Isn't that what they asked for?

Don't kill the messenger. But if you insist on bashing Greenpeace, read up on the SVTC:

http://svtc.etoxics.org/site/PageServer

They're taking Apple to task for similar infractions.

We use the computers, so we are also responsible, as is Apple, for knowing the facts.

I agree with the comments on how skewed Greenpeace is and how local governemnet is responsible. They remind me of another hypocritical organization PETA. For those of you that don't know this, PETA kills more animals per year then the local pound and SPCA combined.

Don't believe it? Do some research. I did an it was an eye opening experience

Greenpeace have picked the most PR-able target with Apple. Apple are no more (or less) environmentally unfriendly than most other PC manufacturer. But spoofing the Dell web site wouldn't have been as easy.

However, as others have said above, Apple should be leading the way with sustainable manufacturing processes, more ethical workplace practices, better recycling, and eliminating hazardous materials.

Macs generally have longer lifespans than PC's - people are still using 4-5 year old machines, there's a better second hand market. PC's are 2 year disposable throwaways - you can't even give them away.

One area I'd like Apple to address is to reduce power consumption, both while running, and in sleep mode. Also, make it easier to switch off with a fast shutdown mode. At the moment it takes me about 10 minutes to shut my Mac down, while every single application asks if I want to save changes that I haven't actually made. Macrodobe products seem particularly bad in this respect. It would be great if the OS could override this and just shutdown, pronto. At the moment if I'm in a hurry to leave my machine stays on all night.