Too bad he could not convert those he left behind. 😉Missionary work amongst the design savages
Too bad he could not convert those he left behind. 😉Missionary work amongst the design savages
On what planet does that logic apply? Not Earth.
You could not find Peak (whatever) ie Peak Oil Peak Phosphorus or Peak uranium?! Google searching is only as good as what you put in the search field.Sure, but much better one part than the entire phone! And if trying to replace that part could cause others to fail, well, any chance of success at all is better than automatically throwing away the whole thing.
I do think I know something of what I'm talking about, but if you have some reading for me I'd be happy to check out alternate viewpoints. You suggested I look up the concept of "Peak", but that's not a Google-able term on its own, I need some context.![]()
I have tried that and there is a good reason for it. Generally the unsupported OS was either unstable or ran worse then the ARM Windows x86 emulator (ie like garbage)Soon Mojave will stop receiving security updates. Yet the machine in in the OP would run newer macOS just fine if Apple did not artificially exclude it as not being compatible.
If that was true the market followed what Apple did then they would have dropped Windows like a hot potato and gone to the MacOS (or at least to open the source Darwin OS) ages ago.I mean, Apple removed the headphone jack to be able to sell you disposable EarPods that have internal batteries and by all accounts don't even last for two years. That's definitely sketchy.
And at Americans feeling discriminated against because Apple is singled out: nobody thinks it's only Apple doing that. But when Apple makes it impossible to replace the phone's battery, the market follows. When Apple removes the headphone jack, the market follows. When Apple solders on RAM and even SSDs to make after market upgrades impossible, the market follows.
I wonder if this actually a problem similar to what Sears supposedly had back when they did full automotive repair. Because there was a "commission" (for lack of a better name) based on the cost of the repair (always a bad idea) the mechanics would always go for the most expensive method possible.Of course there is cost to be saved. If Apple says it costs €1500 to unbend a cable that Louis Rosmann would fix for free - you just LOST €1500 on nothing. Your logic is very very flawed, Sir.
It’s not that I disagree with your actual words, or with the fact that those inventions were made there. It’s just the fact that you created a strawman fallacy with your argument. I put “engineering” in quotes because it was a quote from the article itself. I was pointing out how the UK officials are repeatedly trying to tear down and regulate companies which are based in other countries. And enforce rules for them that would affect the entire company’s world operations.@LeadingHeat I’d love to know which of these you disagree with?
I think you may have meant to reply to someone else, or confused my opinions for those on the post I quoted.Product quality won't have to suffer by making devices more modular. This conflicts with your praise about the longevity of Apple's laptops which are more modular than their successors.
Plus, Apple already has shown a track record of making great modular products with pre-2010 devices.
The British Lawmakers seem to be drinking the same questionable/out of date kool-aid Fixit is:Those British Lawmakers sound uninformed, maybe this video will get them up to speed.
Ah, that makes sense and I happpen to agree with you.It’s not that I disagree with your actual words, or with the fact that those inventions were made there. It’s just the fact that you created a strawman fallacy with your argument. I put “engineering” in quotes because it was a quote from the article itself. I was pointing out how the UK officials are repeatedly trying to tear down and regulate companies which are based in other countries. And enforce rules for them that would affect the entire company’s world operations.
What hypocrisy? Being green, environmentally friendly, etc. is not binary. Because Apple may have an incandescent light bulb in Apple Park, doesn't mean Apple isn't doing their part on the whole.So tired of Apple's PR-focused Environment hypocrisy. This is a true finding. Apple lead, and continues to foster huge environmental losses due to not providing an true enviro-friendly option. Of course most MR readers will ignore all this and flame away at posts like this as they continue to praise Apple no matter what, never really research things, and admire their SOTA phones. Apple long ago could have developed a second line of products similar to what the Fairphone folks have accomplished. This would give consumers who care THE OPTION of not contributing to people living shortened lives in China's rare earth producing areas. This would, though, mean a little less top-line revenue over the years, and would have much more greatly focused people's attention on the impacts of disposable devices. The latter is the most important point. Tim and Apple will never do this because this would remove some of the Apple-Enviro-Halo messaging shine. I'd love to see a photo of Tim and Lisa visiting this location:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth
We know that will never happen.
Because they are not green. They are the main instigators of creating disposable devices. Manufacturing in China, with little to no environmental regulation and oversight. Phones, tablets and even laptops are becoming unrepairable due to their obsession for control and form over function. And then they tout recycling of them being so green, while all they do is being compliant with EU laws on electrical and electronic equipment waste:What hypocrisy? Being green, environmentally friendly, etc. is not binary. Because Apple may have an incandescent light bulb in Apple Park, doesn't mean Apple isn't doing their part on the whole.
What we as a society might have to accept is that sleek design is now out the window. For example, any fully serviceable laptops with the form factor of a Macbook laptop exist?
Apple is not green. Apple is compliant. And they are marketing compliancy as eco-friendly. That is hypocrisy. If Apple was green, they would go above and beyond what is required from them by law. And if they did that, I'd have no problem with them marketing it. I would want them to, so people would use that as one of the decision factors for buying a device. But not when they are just complaint with the law in order to be able to sell product in that region. That's not being green, that's business necessity.If you manufacture, distribute or sell electrical and electronic equipment such as computers, fridges, mobile phones, EU and national laws require that you contribute to ensuring it is disposed of and treated properly. This means:
- registering with the responsible national authorities ("registers") in each country where you distribute or sell equipment
- filing a regular report on the amount of sold electrical and electronic equipment,
- organising or financing the collection, treatment, recycling and recovery of your products
- as a distributor, providing a take-back service, whereby your customers can return electric and electronic waste free of charge
- as a manufacturer, complying with the directive on the restriction of hazardous substances
You're playing with words, imo. Working toward a net zero carbon footprint sounds like it's being more than compliant, it's being green. In my original post, I state that having an incandescent light bulb light something on Apple Park does not negate any effort they might be striving for, and you are "metaphorically dinging" Apple for that incandescent light bulb. To each their own I guess.Because they are not green. They are the main instigators of creating disposable devices. Manufacturing in China, with little to no environmental regulation and oversight. Phones, tablets and even laptops are becoming unrepairable due to their obsession for control and form over function. And then they tout recycling of them being so green, while all they do is being compliant with EU laws on electrical and electronic equipment waste:
Apple is not green. Apple is compliant. And they are marketing compliancy as eco-friendly. That is hypocrisy. If Apple was green, they would go above and beyond what is required from them by law. And if they did that, I'd have no problem with them marketing it. I would want them to, so people would use that as one of the decision factors for buying a device. But not when they are just complaint with the law in order to be able to sell product in that region. That's not being green, that's business necessity.
Even if you feel that what Apple does means they are being green, there still is no reason to boast about it and use your green-ness in marketing when what you do is regulatory compliance. Everybody does it, they have to, or they are not allowed to sell in the EU. If you want to boast, you better make sure you're doing significantly more than is forced upon you by law or someone will call you out on it sooner or later.You're playing with words, imo. Working toward a net zero carbon footprint sounds like it's being more than compliant, it's being green. In my original post, I state that having an incandescent light bulb light something on Apple Park does not negate any effort they might be striving for, and you are "metaphorically dinging" Apple for that incandescent light bulb. To each their own I guess.
I don't see an issue in marketing that any company is striving for less of an environmental impact.Even if you feel that what Apple does means they are being green, there still is no reason to boast about it and use your green-ness in marketing when what you do is regulatory compliance. Everybody does it, they have to, or they are not allowed to sell in the EU. If you want to boast, you better make sure you're doing significantly more than is forced upon you by law or someone will call you out on it sooner or later.
There is a reason why Apple products seem to last a long time. For example, my iphone 4 10 years later is serving as a glorified ipod.You can make your US headquarters as green as you want, but if you produce your products in countries that don't take the environment too seriously and your e-waste solution is to just comply with regulatory demands, then its all show and no substance. That's all I'm saying.
The engineering and longevity, imo, is the trade-off.EDIT: and you should definitely not use that compliance as an excuse to make your products such that they are almost unrepairable and basically disposable.
No and no.The engineering and longevity, imo, is the trade-off.
I don’t disagree with that per se. But “jobs” (as I understood your original point) isn’t sufficient justification for poor environmental practices. (Maybe that’s not what you meant?) It’s a common argument, and one that’s a false dichotomy. You can have both if both are prioritized.
Well, these aren’t gas guzzling cars. They’re PCs and phones: the difference in energy use between old and new is negligible.
It’s “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle”—in that order. Recycling is a last resort. You can’t upgrade your iPhone for the environment. The act of discarding an old device—even if highly recyclable—is harmful.
The longer someone keeps a device (and doesn’t buy a new one), the better.
Ironically paper production is not a threat to trees in the US and Canada as Sustainable Forests are the rule. The major downside with "paperless" is that if one is not careful it can result in more paper than before as there is always the possibility you may need the paper backup due to a human error. I had such situation as I paid my mortgage about 3 months ahead of time but the bank changed its system and if I hadn't had my paper copies the "cushion" I had built up would have been gone.I have been "paperless" nearly - for several years now. I guess I am saving a lot of trees. Maybe I wouldn't be paperless if I did not have such powerful computers.
So, what? We should stop improving and making new tech because it encourages throwing the old tech away?
Sounds like a great plan for progress.