5 ms·

I don't think it's contempt. It may appear to be contempt in the eyes of large customers, but from Apple's perspective they want to make the best products they

by MJR 14y ago

I don't think it's contempt. It may appear to be contempt in the eyes of large customers, but from Apple's perspective they want to make the best products they can. If that is counter to the way the EPEAT guidelines operate, but they can offer equal or superior environmental impact and produce the products they want, isn't that ok? Honest question: Are you not able to compare the EPEAT guidelines with what Apple currently does? They provide details on all of the things you mentioned - hazardous materials, energy efficiency, etc. It seems like they should still stand up to EPEAT, despite the recycling bit, considering that they offer recycling of their products. http://www.apple.com/environment/ http://www.apple.com/environment/

Spooky23 14y ago
That webpage is part-information, part-marketing. It conveys the message that the company wants to tell. EPEAT's criteria come from published IEEE standards, last updated in 2009. Other vendors with similar form-factors seem to be able to meet the EPEAT criteria. The new "Ultrabooks", which are similar form-factor wise to Apple products, seem to be capable of meeting EPEAT Silver criteria. What is Apple's commitment? Right now they may meet EPEAT Gold standards. Will they next month? I suppose that I could hire people to figure this out, but why should I? There are plenty of competitors with quality products. Why couldn't Apple have proposed updates to EPEAT, if it's so hopelessly out of date? A: They hold the institutional/corporate customer in contempt.
div 14y ago
It is perfectly ok if they can offer equal or superior recycling. I don't think this is a claim you can really make right now though. When you send a device back to Apple for recycling, there's no way to find out what their recycling standards are. Subscribing to EPEAT objectifies this, and makes it easier to know what happens when an EPEAT device is recycled.
snowwrestler 14y ago
The crucial point from the perspective of corporate procurement is that it externalizes the decision. While the parent could probably do the research and make a solid comparison to EPEAT, his employer would not believe him. Large organizations want to be able to set a policy that even dumb procurement staff can follow, and certifications like EPEAT give them that.

by MJR 14y ago

Spooky23 14y ago

That webpage is part-information, part-marketing. It conveys the message that the company wants to tell. EPEAT's criteria come from published IEEE standards, last updated in 2009. Other vendors with similar form-factors seem to be able to meet the EPEAT criteria. The new "Ultrabooks", which are similar form-factor wise to Apple products, seem to be capable of meeting EPEAT Silver criteria. What is Apple's commitment? Right now they may meet EPEAT Gold standards. Will they next month? I suppose that I could hire people to figure this out, but why should I? There are plenty of competitors with quality products. Why couldn't Apple have proposed updates to EPEAT, if it's so hopelessly out of date? A: They hold the institutional/corporate customer in contempt.

div 14y ago

It is perfectly ok if they can offer equal or superior recycling. I don't think this is a claim you can really make right now though. When you send a device back to Apple for recycling, there's no way to find out what their recycling standards are. Subscribing to EPEAT objectifies this, and makes it easier to know what happens when an EPEAT device is recycled.

snowwrestler 14y ago

The crucial point from the perspective of corporate procurement is that it externalizes the decision. While the parent could probably do the research and make a solid comparison to EPEAT, his employer would not believe him. Large organizations want to be able to set a policy that even dumb procurement staff can follow, and certifications like EPEAT give them that.