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.
San Francisco to Block Most Municipal Mac Purchases Following Apple's EPEAT Withdrawal
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It is a long proven fact that Macs need less maintenance then a PC. How many times have you heard of a Mac going down after an upgrade because of driver issues or Macs going down because of a virus.
Well that's only one maybe two cost factors. I'm talking total cost of ownership (software, training, service, etc). Macs also don't play nice 100% of the time in other environments - which causes work-arounds and other issues.
Further - it's a long proven fact that most of the time - physical maintenance is impossible because on many Apple products - that maintenance has to be done off-site.
There are many factors which affect costs for a company when choosing Apple. That's not to say Apple computers aren't great. They are. But I don't see how it's ever been PROVEN that it costs less long term.
It honestly amazes me how many people on this site blindly follow Apple and anything they do.
Apple withdraws all of their computers from EPEAT so all of the sudden EPEAT is "stagnant" and "against innovation" etc and the City of San Francisco and its people are "idiots" and all anti-Apple. If this this was an article about how Apple renewed its commitment to EPEAT and the City of SF decided that they would be replacing some of their Windows PCs with Macs people would be heaping praises over EPEAT and SF, calling them "innovative-friendly" etc. (by the way, I want to shoot the next person that says that word in a sentence related to Apple).
I don't see how Apple's new direction of less-recyclable and harder to repair computers is good for anybody. The Unibody MBP was already thin enough for me and I think for most people. But nope, gotta shave off another few mm!
The simple fact that their macbook air line of laptops is so popular is proof that there are many people out there willing to forgo options such as extra ports or upgradeability for the luxury of a slim, light and ultra-portable device. I am sure Apple has done its research and determined these to be the factors that fewest people care about, or at least do not care enough to impact their purchasing decision.
In a time when laptops were getting bigger, bulkier and heavier, it took apple to remind people that laptops are supposed to be light, portable yet not have to sacrifice too much in terms of performance.
I have personally never heard of EPEAT myself. SF is not wrong in sticking to its policy. However, it bears remembering that policies are created by man, and not necessarily foolproof. Assumptions or beliefs made at the time of crafting said policy may no longer be true or applicable today. It's like army SOP, there are times when it can be justified to break the SOP.
In light of Apple's statement, I think EPEAT may at least warrant a review to see if it is still relevant, or if any directives can be fine-tuned.