Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Lots of material to recycle, given Apple's planned obsolescence with glued/soldered in components.

Yes. Some of us remember back in 2012 when Apple threatened to drop its relationship with the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) registry because their glued together laptops were given low ratings.

(They backed off after a public outcry, and a belated realization that government programs required the rating.)

Perhaps not so surprisingly, EPEAT later changed their recyclability rating rules and suddenly gave most of Apple's products a "gold star" rating... even though nothing much had changed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: youngsam and H2SO4
Yes. Some of us remember back in 2012 when Apple threatened to drop its relationship with the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) registry because their glued together laptops were given low ratings.

(They backed off after a public outcry, and a belated realization that government programs required such the rating.)

Perhaps not so surprisingly, EPEAT later changed their recyclability rating rules and suddenly gave most of Apple's products a "gold star" rating... even though nothing much had changed.
A little money changing hands, under the table, will do that.

But hey, some people think a couple sticks of RAM and a couple SSDs are less environmentally friendly, than 8 entire computers. To those folks, the above makes perfect sense :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: youngsam
Aluminum213 said:
show me the facts, it's al theories that haven't been proven
many have now provided you links and resources for thousands of studies and reserach papers, that have been peer reviewed and accepted by the larger scientific communities.

And if they haven't been "proven", then there are scientific studies that have been done to disprove them, that will have been published and peer reviewed as well.

You and others have put a lot of effort into educating the person with will researched and backed up reasoning, and it's like you're talking to a brick wall.

Robert Heinlein said "Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.". I think that's pretty relevant. You're right, you are so far beyond right that there is really nothing to discuss or debate. If that other person wants to wallow in ignorance and resist any attempts to help him, why waste your time trying to help him? There's better things you can do with your time, and far more interesting people for you to talk to.

It's like he refuses to accept that 2+2=4 and demands you prove it. You try to teach him Peano logic and he says he doesn't understand that so you have to explain it to him on his own terms. Why is he even worth the effort to you?
 
LOL at the moving goalposts. Climate change denial in action folks...

There is no scientific consensus

So you're further proving my point that it is merely a theory with a consensus and not a proven fact

Next up, an absurdly extreme definition of 'proven'

Followed by, 'okay it's real, but it's too late to stop it.'

Followed by, 'okay, we could stop it, but nobody has the right to tell me how to lead my lifestyle, just to save some people who are probably liberals anyway. Let the free market solve it, so I don't have to do anything.'

...which is what this is really about, and it would save everyone's time if we could just skip right to that part.

Edit: bolding added after reading post #163 below
 
Last edited:
LOL at the moving goalposts. Climate change denial in action folks...





Next up, an absurdly extreme definition of 'proven'

Followed by, 'okay it's real, but it's too late to stop it.'

Followed by, 'okay, we could stop it, but nobody has the right to tell me how to lead my lifestyle, just to save some people who are probably liberals anyway. Let the free market solve it, so I don't have to do anything.'

...which is what this is really about, and it would save everyone's time if we could just skip right to that part.

You still have him describe why there are reputable scientist who don't believe in climate change
 
Apple's real position on environmentalism: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/apple-recycling-iphones-macbooks

Apple is an environmental disaster.
This is the bit I don't understand though……
Documents from Illinois show that the vast majority of Apple's recycling is of televisions, printers, DVD players, VCRs, computers, and monitors. This is because older technology is heavier, more often recycled, and state recycling quotas are based on weight, not total number of items. There are, nonetheless, plenty of MacBooks and iPhones with latent value that eventually make it to electronics recyclers.
Apple don’t even make half of those items. How are they responsible for them?
[doublepost=1492865067][/doublepost]
Even if you don't believe in climate change or are dead set against "the liberal agenda," why are you against humans being resourceful instead of wasteful?
I’ve replied to your post for three reasons;
  1. It’s top rated.
  2. Because it makes sense.
  3. Because Apple can really be a sham(e) ful company at times as this is mostly marketing. Posts 138 and 157 are quite eye opening.
[doublepost=1492865170][/doublepost]
This is a very lofty goal (ending mining) and I commend Apple on doing it.

That is despicable and it creates more waste, Apple should be ashamed.
One thing Apple should pledge to end is the use of 100% recycled marketing materials for the press to eat up.
[doublepost=1492865300][/doublepost]
You still have him describe why there are reputable scientist who don't believe in climate change
Whilst you, I, they et al, may disagree on climate change, surely you can see that using less resources in the first place is a good thing? Even if we aren’t where the ‘fearmongers’ state we are, if we continue on this trajectory does it not make sense that it will eventually spell trouble?
 
Last edited:
This is the bit I don't understand though……
Documents from Illinois show that the vast majority of Apple's recycling is of televisions, printers, DVD players, VCRs, computers, and monitors. This is because older technology is heavier, more often recycled, and state recycling quotas are based on weight, not total number of items. There are, nonetheless, plenty of MacBooks and iPhones with latent value that eventually make it to electronics recyclers.
Apple don’t even make half of those items. How are they responsible for them?
[doublepost=1492865067][/doublepost]
I’ve replied to your post for three reasons;
  1. It’s top rated.
  2. Because it makes sense.
  3. Because Apple can really be a sham(e) ful company at times as this is mostly marketing. Posts 138 and 157 are quite eye opening.
[doublepost=1492865170][/doublepost]
One thing Apple should pledge to end is the use of 100% recycled marketing materials for the press to eat up.
[doublepost=1492865300][/doublepost]
Whilst you, I, they et al, may disagree on climate change, surely you can see that using less resources in the first place is a good thing? Even if we aren’t where the ‘fearmongers’ state we are, if we continue on this trajectory does it not make sense that it will eventually spell trouble?

Yes, less resources is a good thing, but separate from the climate change hoax
 
You still have him describe why there are reputable scientist who don't believe in climate change

Ah, the pathetic irony of a climate skeptic making his last stand by appealing to scientific authority.
 
Last edited:
p
[doublepost=1492892480][/doublepost] thum_003.png
 
They just need to plant more fossil fuel trees and everything will be okay.
[doublepost=1492959438][/doublepost]
Yes, less resources is a good thing, but separate from the climate change hoax

You just need to plant more hoax trees and everything will be okay.
[doublepost=1492959469][/doublepost]
Ah, the pathetic irony of a climate skeptic making his last stand by appealing to scientific authority.

You just need to plant more scientific authority trees and everything will be okay.
 
They took the CD drive out of the mac mini how many years ago? The machine is still the same form factor, they've added nothing in its place and the space it used to occupy is still an empty void.

I've never understood the obsession to change the form factor just because it hasn't changed. One thing Apple users hate more than no change is actual change (not only changing form factor, Apple tends to take away more than it gives: Floppy drives, CDs, Ethernet ports, headphone jacks, USB ports).

Leaving the empty space still allows people to put a CD Drive in it (or add more HD/SSD storage).
Do people really need their MacMinis to be smaller? Do they really want it smaller and less serviceable?

Speaking of the iPhone 4, I'd be more than happy to have that form factor still, that and the 5 actually had enough of an edge that you could hold onto it or put a plain bumper on (no back required) and still see most of the phone without adding too much bulk...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.