The outright lying is starting to really bug me.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces 'FineWoven' Material, Will No Longer Make Leather Accessories
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The goal is to kill less cows. What is so hard to understand about that?
Some people say that whale meat is quite delicious as well.
Yet there is wide consensus that slaughtering whales is not acceptable.
They could have made better colors. I’m so disappointed with the color selection in the bands, cases, and MagSafe wallets. You should make people excited about these products, instead they’re getting the opposite effect.
Methinks that perhaps you need to do some reading about evolution. Even Neanderthals survived on meat 300,000 years ago. Evolution involves genetic mutation, not choice, and takes tens of thousands of years, e.g., "you're not interested in evolving" has nothing to do with it. We might evolve to needing to eat even more meat to survive. There is no choice or virtue signal that will influence genetic mutation or evolution as a whole.
Tastes somewhat like liver to me so never again. Had it in Norway about 15 years ago.
So are the Hermes bands FineWoven as well, or are they still using leather and chalking that up to "being fancy?"
Couldn't have said it better. Though I'll add to your point about the "carbon neutral" virtue signaling that they are doing. Of which Apple will never be. Unless they somehow figured out how to recycle batteries from their power systems, recycle all parts of a solar panel and the wind turbines, or at least promote and switch to Nuclear Energy, they will never come close to "carbon neutral". Not to mention how many animals are being killed by the wind turbines and the clearing of huge swaths of land for the solar panels.
If you've kept up with the leather industry over the past 100 years, you'd find that the "natural" way of making leather is long gone. Leather is now made with over 100 toxic chemicals and takes decades to decompose. The tanning industry itself is harmful to the environment.
As far as where it comes from, the hide is worth more than all of the meat. So if there's any one item of a cow that would impact less of them being slaughtered, this would be it. There's nothing to buy into here, it's just a common sense move that is forward looking. I don't like Apple more or less for doing it, but I expect it to start happening in far more places after this.
The people flying to Davos in private jets and telling us to eat bugs and live in “15-minute cities” hardly practice what they preach.
Nuclear power is far better at reducing carbon emissions than eliminating leather. Wind power usually relies on oil and gas as a backup. It is disappointing that Apple isn’t pushing the envelope in more creative ways to improve the environment.
Whale sashimi is actually quite good indeed.
Slaughtering whales was endangering the species because of over hunting. Last I checked, cows were not in danger of extinction… 😉
People love to tout the number of birds that die each year to those wind turbines, but never anything more than that. We kill about 360x the number of birds with our cars and trucks every year. If the entire country relied ONLY on wind turbines, we'd still kill 1/180th of the birds our highways kill. And guess what? Cats kill even more than that!
As far as clearing land, that's about the dumbest talking point I've ever heard. Everything we build does that, and we cover this country in asphalt.
Nuclear is definitely the best option right now...but let's not pretend that recycling parts of fossil fuel power plants is any better or easier than solar or wind. Wind is going to be pretty easy, really, the fiberglass stuff is easily reused.
I am not sure if you are being serious or not. I am also not sure why you pivoted from them talking about the wearable and smartphones to computers. The leading smartphone manufacturer only supports 4-5 years, so from an industry perspective, their sustainability is at least, if not over, double that of longest providing competitor. From a laptop perspective, most studies (even an article posted by HP one of the largest laptop providers in the world) show that PC laptops last on average the same 4-5 years. So again, Apple would be doubling up on the competition. Is there room for improvement? Yeah. But is it just "feel good" when you are producing something that is twice as sustainable as the rest of the industry? My personal opinion is no, that is being more sustainable.
Some company will make leather bands so this is a non-issue. FFS grow up. Don't like the new material, then don't buy one. It is really that simple.
Since all of the cows have to die in order to create this “methane free” world, we might as well use the byproducts of the ones that have to perish.
I care. And pretty sure I am not alone in this.
But you are right, there need to be less cows,
and taking leather production for one rather
large corporation off the table is a great step
in this direction.
Yet offshore wind farms pose a bigger threat to whales than a few small whaling communities in Iceland.
Isn't it better to reuse the petrochemical based materials that are already in use VS making bands out of net new materials that aren't? Just the harvesting and processing of those materials are going to produce more carbon output than the reuse of existing materials. For net new petrochemical products, yeah we should use alternatives, but that shouldn't REPLACE the reuse of already existing petrochemical items.
Lipstick on a pig is sort of an extreme stance, in my opinion. Why do I think that opinion is throwing the baby out with the bathwater? Everyone has to work within the constructs of our current structures unless they want to live social disconnected (e.g. you participate in structures if you live in or near a city). There is no way they are going to stop capitalism nor our consumption based society. So when in the constructs trying to make those systems less polluting, especially at Apple' scale, is a fairly large impact. Does it completely change our systems? No. But it is tangible and LARGE movements in the right direction.
Could more be done? Yes. Could we change our society to better harmonize and be better stewards of our fragile planet? Yes. Does that mean that Apple changing their processes is meaningless? No.
This is just incorrect.
Leather is expensive and polluting to treat. This isn’t an attempt to save cows. It’s an attempt to save the environment.
It will be interesting to see how Apple Watch Hermes and related accessories sell. Apple used to sell the “jumping“ bands for $319 and the single tour leather for $329. Now most of the bands are $349, though interestingly there is no difference between the 41mm and 45mm pricing. Double tour are $100 more, but they don’t have anything more expensive than that.
I think this is a really good point. I applaud what they are doing Re clean energy, recycling etc but you are right - nightmare and cost to repair most of their devices.
Yeah but why let facts get in the way of the hordes of leather loving meat eaters on this forum. As I said above, thankfully Apple have decided so doesn't matter what we think. Thankfully (in UK anyway) leather in retreat across the board (cars, clothes etc).