Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple posts an image of solar cells in a newspaper and all of a sudden Apple is environmentally conscious. People now praise them and say how much respect they have for them. Apple doesn't donate to charities but it's all good and no one minds. And yet the trolls manage to find a way to bash Samsung for no reason at all.

Meanwhile Samsung has been green for years already. They have a partnership with the Boys & Girls Club of America. Donate to schools all across the world. They donate mobile classrooms, solar LED lanterns, solar powered classrooms, etc. And zero ****s are given.

Thanks macrumors forum members. I needed a good laugh this morning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apple posts an image of solar cells in a newspaper and all of a sudden Apple is environmentally conscious. People now praise them and say how much respect they have for them. Apple doesn't donate to charities but it's all good and no one minds. And yet the trolls manage to find a way to bash Samsung for no reason at all.

Meanwhile Samsung has been green for years already. They have a partnership with the Boys & Girls Club of America. Donate to schools all across the world. They donate mobile classrooms, solar LED lanterns, solar powered classrooms, etc. And zero ****s are given.

Thanks macrumors forum members. I needed a good laugh this morning.

You should check your facts.
 
Heres a novel idea, maybe you could point out which "facts" were incorrect?

Since apparently the burden of proof no longer rests on people making the arguments, okay:

Apple posts an image of solar cells in a newspaper and all of a sudden Apple is environmentally conscious.

It's more than just posting pictures. Apple's datacenters are being powered by renewable energy, including but not limited to solar. The facts are here.

Apple doesn't donate to charities but it's all good and no one minds.

Apple donated $50 million to charity last year. There may be more in previous years, they just haven't spoken about it. Not boasting doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen, but it's easy fodder for Fandroids to pick at.
 
Heres a novel idea, maybe you could point out which "facts" were incorrect?

Sure. I though it was obvious.

"Apple posts an image of solar cells in a newspaper and all of a sudden Apple is environmentally conscious."
https://www.apple.com/environment/our-progress/

"Apple doesn't donate to charities"
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/08/apple-institutes-new-charitable-matching-program-for-employees/
https://www.apple.com/product-red/

----------

Since apparently the burden of proof no longer rests on people making the arguments, okay:



It's more than just posting pictures. Apple's datacenters are being powered by renewable energy, including but not limited to solar. The facts are here.



Apple donated $50 million to charity last year. There may be more in previous years, they just haven't spoken about it. Not boasting doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen, but it's easy fodder for Fandroids to pick at.

I guess it was obvious! :)
 
The goalposts have moved to "well apple doesn't give ENOUGH money to charity".

Compared to other companies, no they don't give that much. There's no getting around that.

But that wasn't the point. It was because of the claim that they gave $50 million "last year" (2013).

The money raised by Product Red (a lot of which was not Apple's money, but buyer's) was over an eight year span. The donation to Stanford Medical was revealed in early 2012, and probably referred back to 2011 when Jobs was dying.

Mind you, I think it's great that Cook is starting to do things like match employee contributions, which other companies have done for years. He's bringing Apple back into being more normal, a bit at a time.
 
Compared to other companies, no they don't give that much. There's no getting around that.

But that wasn't the point. It was because of the claim that they gave $50 million "last year" (2013).

The money raised by Product Red (a lot of which was not Apple's money, but buyer's) was over an eight year span. The donation to Stanford Medical was revealed in early 2012, and probably referred back to 2011 when Jobs was dying.

Mind you, I think it's great that Cook is starting to do things like match employee contributions, which other companies have done for years. He's bringing Apple back into being more normal, a bit at a time.

It's irrelevant to the discussion how much they give had you been following the thread.

I agree about cook.
 
You totally did a "Samsung" with my original post...:rolleyes:

What I think is funnier is how you resurrected a story that had been dead for 3 weeks just so you could post a snarky remark. Posts like that make me want to sell up my Apple products then live a life of poverty living in a cave.
 
What I think is funnier is how you resurrected a story that had been dead for 3 weeks just so you could post a snarky remark. Posts like that make me want to sell up my Apple products then live a life of poverty living in a cave.

Apple products carry a higher resale value than Samsung, you should be fine :D
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.