klasma
macrumors G4
I’m pretty sure that without copyright laws, we would get many more Harry Potter/Star Wars/Marvel superhero/Lord of the Rings/… adaptations, and remakes, sequels and prequels of anything popular.
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 Hits Record 30% Recycled Content Across All Products in 2025
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
jchap
macrumors 6502a
Yes, to my understanding, users have to explicitly use the device reset process in System Settings on macOS to wipe their devices and allow them to be safely transferred to the next party.
It’s kind of buried in the settings, but it is the user’s responsibility to do so, if they want to unlink their device from Apple’s servers and from their account.
code-m
Suspended
Didn’t Apple spearhead the internal battery on mobile devices like iPhone, iPad and MacBook plus eventually glueing it to make it more difficult to repair.
Prior to this I believe mobile phones and laptops had removable batteries. This is Apple’s doing to claim it made the device thin and light.
And where they are supposed to be followed, environmental legislation is being downregulated. Looking at you, USA. Luckily, Apple is not changing course.
Le0M
macrumors 65816
Yes and no.
Yes because it costs energy.
No because if that energy is so-called "green", then you don't need to worry too much.
repoman016
macrumors 6502
I get it, my environmental impact is tiny. But my core point is that if someone is trying to claim how environmentally friendly they are, going through a process where you destroy and then make a product is not as environmentally friendly as simply allowing that product to be used with another item.
I get why things like the current iPhone won't work with the older cases, but I went from a 13 Pro Max to a 15 Pro Max...essentially the same design, but they made the phones just enough different to not allow a case from one to be used with the other.
code-m
Suspended
Unless you give-up your private jet, anything you do is a drop in the ocean concerning the environment. If you are in a league to own a private jet you wouldn’t have time on these forums. Convincing your private jet friends to also give-up theirs will then start making a difference. The plebs are just being mocked to convince them that they can make a difference.
Do you know what percentage of one’s recycled waste actually gets recycled? Not much because many places don’t have the expensive equipment to do it and it cost too much. Having those recycling bin just makes the public feel better that their actions are making a difference but reality is not the situation. We have to keep living the lie.
@bondr006 Since you disagree with my statement, please explain how Apple can all these machines to be re-used without enabling stolen machines?
That’s fine, but then you don’t get to go on about how you’re doing anything for the planet.
They make great phones with planned obsolescence, and that’s it.
Don’t let them eat their cake too
Abazigal
Contributor
And it probably did too. And you cannot deny that a thinner and lighter device is also a more useable product (especially when the user has to carry it to and from work every day).
Which just goes to show that product design is, at its heart, an exercise in compromises and trade-offs. People want a device that's more easily repairable, more readily serviceable, but the conversation just seems to stop here. There is no follow-up on what exactly that entails on the overall design of the product (eg: would people be okay with AirPods that are thicker and bulkier in order to get swappable batteries in the ear stems?)
Same thing with the Macbook Neo. You want a device that's cheap and more repairable, you don't get a design that's as sleek and beautiful as the MacBook Air.
The problem comes with critics positing this as a move with zero downside, rather than it being another design consideration in a long laundry list of other competing priorities when conceptualising a product (like looks and portability, which matter just as much, if not more, to the end user).
At the end of the day, Apple is in the business of making products that sell (by being attractive to the end user). They will make improvements to the environment footprint of creating those products where viable, and when it does not impact their bottom line too much, or maybe even when they stand to profit from it (like when they removed chargers from iPhones).
Apple will try and make the most environmentally friendly version of products that consumers demand, is the way I look at it.
If consumers demand products that are incredibly bad for the environment, Apple will try and make the most environmentally friendly version of that product even if what they make is still bad for the environment.
The most environmentally friendly product Apple could make is no product. But then Apple wouldn’t exist, and consumers would simply buy what they wanted/needed from another company, so the environmental impact would still occur.
Out of interest, which company do people think makes the most environmentally friendly phone, and why?
And based on data, which phones actually last the longest?
Last edited:
Do we have any data that says how long fairphones last, especially in comparison to other phones?