Seriously, does anyone really believe this "environmentally friendly" crap from Apple (and other companies)
Not Apple, but some smaller firms are interested. Sometimes environmental concerns intersect with profit, such as insulation/energy efficient devices. Some of the brightest and highest earning people I've had the pleasure of working with would much prefer me to maintain their stable 5-plus year old systems than ride the upgrade treadmill. Yes, some applications
do benefit from regular updates to the latest hardware/software, but most do not.
If they really cared about the environment they would make computers that lasted for more than a couple of years and make it possible to have them repaired like in the old days of electronics.
Indeed. Same for much electronics built in the last decade or two. At the end of the '90s the family home finally saw the TVs/VCRs/washing machines/etc bought in the early '80s become uneconomical. Nothing has lasted that long since. Yes, the initial cost was higher then, but it is more rational to care about "average cost to run X per year considering repairs/replacements" not "cost of a new X".
What is more, an old TV that I can repair myself (OK, I won't risk repairing a CRT myself, but I can fix other electronics) or have someone out to fix the same day is a lot more convenient than some black box I need to have sent off for days.
buying a complete upper part of the laptop just because the trackpad button is worn out. Now, Apple -is that thinking about the environment?
To quote a repair enthusiast, "If Apple can save 5 cents on a part, they will". Especially if it means using solder and glue instead of cables and fittings. They sell cheap hardware at high margins, so it's more economical for them to replace than repair. For most computers in my charge, if almost anything goes wrong I have a spare in a drawer I can swap out in 10 minutes.
Of course, if a VAX falls over, there exists a community of enthusiasts that could advise me at the PCB component level. I acknowledge that current mount tech makes this less feasible, but one can still e.g.
replace a bad cap.
I'll be keeping my 3 year old Powerbook G4 until I can no longer use it even though it's considered a "dinosaur" by most people these days.
If it does what you need it to do, good work!
Bravo, Apple, you're making a PR exercise out of regulatory compliance (to appeal to the hep but clueless freshman crowd, no doubt). Now make hardware in all your equipment easier to swap out - all batteries in everything, and an iMac in the style of the original G5 - and people outside the Mac world will take your "green" efforts seriously. And comparing an idle laptop to a traditional incandescent light bulb is thoroughly misleading.
There are a few complainers -- however -- that use a glossy screen and do not like them.
Of course. People who don't like glossy will have made the decision to avoid it ages ago. Just because something is OK for some, it doesn't mean it's OK for all others. People are different. People's environments and workloads are different.
If you don't use the glossy screen right in front of the sun, you should be fine.
Any glare will involve more refocusing and brain processing. Some eyes and brains might be designed such that this won't significantly affect performance, others won't. That's why choice is great.
