Message to UK parliament: Guys, you are not that important. You are not 20% of the EU.
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.
UK Environmental Committee Says Apple Contributing to 'Throwaway Culture' of 'Short-Lived Products'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I thought they recycled them to use in new products, like the metals and stuff?
maybe i’m mistaken?
You got that the wrong way round.
Apple protecting the environment is not an effective strategy against committees that want environmental virtue signalling.
Exactly - especially considering the back -panel parts cost is probably around 20-30 GBP (bill of materials cost) - but Apple will not allow third parties access to parts.
That's what you think. Soldered on lasts longer. The contacts are better, things can't move, it lasts longer. And I think there is a huge difference between "repairable" and "repaired". If you make it easy to repair but it lasts only two years without a repair, then many people will throw it away after two years, while the harder to repair product that lasts three years will be thrown away after three years. Maybe the percentage of items thrown away after two years is a bit lower, but many people are not going to repair anything, no matter how repairable.
You can continue improving and releasing new and better products. Just dont make them unservicable if something small breaks or charge a huge amounts of money for replacing a broken part. E.g. Apple charging you 800 dollars for swaping an entire logic board of your mac when there is an issue with just one of the ports. I cant see how soldering the ssd and ram to the logic board improves in any way the product or drives innovation. I also cant see how using standard screws in your devices harms in any way your end-product or the user. Using tons of glue on the iMac instead of screw makes even a small repair such as changing faulty camera a huge problem. And I can continue. And it is not just Apple but many companies. All electronic devices should be engineered with servicing in mind and long useful life.
Apple is surprised? I find that rather hard to believe. Yes, Apple does promote a throw-away culture because no upgrades are made available. Unlike many PCs, you cannot simply swap new parts for old to keep the important bits of your kit updated. Wouldn't it be nice if I could swap new guts into the cases of my Apple devices to "renew" them.
Two important aspects as to why most of "recycling" is BS when you look at the total life-cycle:
1. Recycling is labour / resource intensive. For some materials it's break even (Al), other mixed materials like plastics, glass cannot effectively be re-used for anything of value. Note that all of it involves sending trash back to some 3rd world country via container ships that burn the dirtiest bitumen the market can find.
2. Joe public has to earn money for the newest "upgrade" iPhone. That money comes from jobs that in 99% of the cases further burden the environment.
the only obvious way to reduce _total_ net resources on the planet is to be able to make do longer with electronics.
Back in the old days, electronics like TVs lasted _decades_ as did washing machines, telephones, etc. I'm still using Test & Measurement equipment from the 80s and 90s in my work. For all the ills of the paper-office, pen and paper are less burdensome than regular iPad purchases.
Similarly so with garments - people used to re-sole shoes!
Do not fall into the trap of believing that just because Apple makes a big song and dance about bing able to recycle 99.99999% of its Al, that is is somehow good for the environment to use iPhones.
Especially when the majority of Apple products would last another 1-2 years with a simple battery replacement. But Apple effectively prices the official replacements so high (here at least) that most people opt for the new phone / Macbook instead.
Glue and custom screws are not an "innovation".
Also, about the UK: look up ARM.
Apple should be given credit for the longevity of their products. iPhones for instance are used the longest. With that said, Apple can also do more. Repairs are way too expensive and Apple, if truly committed to a green agenda, needs to seek to repair devices at true cost of material and labour, not an insignificant profit line on the balance sheet that's nonetheless enough to stop people from repairing their devices in the instances where they break.
I am doing my part (much to Apple's chagrin). I am still using my early '08 MBP (with upgraded SSD and ram of course). Still works amazingly well for web surfing as long as I have high security settings turned on to block ads and trackers.
What for?
Heck, I'm still running Mojave on my main machine and wouldn't upgrade just yet if you paid me.
Do (we) Europeans go after non-American companies like (we) do Apple? Sorry to break the news bud, but Apple's not special in this regard. All companies are held to the same standards, and you only hear about American companies because, well, you follow news related to American companies.
Toughbooks use sockets, and they survive shock and vibration tests that Macbooks are not designed to handle, even with soldering. Sockets are fine. SSDs on the other hand are guaranteed to fail, inching towards their end with every write operation. They are disposable, and anything soldered to them must be considered disposable as well.
The report is junk science and useful only as toilet paper.
When computers and other devices move towards system on chips, unibody designs and no moving parts they are easier to recycle and result in less e-waste.
Most of the electronic e-waste in history comes from devices with moving parts and many points of failure. Components like memory sticks, big dusty fans and dead PCIE cards that are out of date so they get chucked out and end up in landfills and our oceans.
The only downside from SoC is ‘right to repair’, but it becomes impossible to repair devices that are moving towards less components and easier recycling. So it’s a useless argument to make.
When computers and other devices move towards system on chips, unibody designs and no moving parts they are easier to recycle and result in less e-waste.
Most of the electronic e-waste in history comes from devices with moving parts and many points of failure. Components like memory sticks, big dusty fans and dead PCIE cards that are out of date so they get chucked out and end up in landfills and our oceans.
The only downside from SoC is ‘right to repair’, but it becomes impossible to repair devices that are moving towards less components and easier recycling. So it’s a useless argument to make.
So let me get this straight... Apple is:
-not the biggest phone seller
-Supports their phones with updates for many years longer than anyone else
-Leads the industry in running its operation on renewable energy
-Announced that they will soon include manufacturing in its 100% renewable measures
-Has a state of the art recycling division
-Uses materials that are recyclable
-Actually uses the recycled material in new products
These are just the items that other phone companies save a ton of money from for not doing and Apple is the one that gets called out for being the problem with the environment. Really? Wow. Makes me rethink what I thought about the UK.
-not the biggest phone seller
-Supports their phones with updates for many years longer than anyone else
-Leads the industry in running its operation on renewable energy
-Announced that they will soon include manufacturing in its 100% renewable measures
-Has a state of the art recycling division
-Uses materials that are recyclable
-Actually uses the recycled material in new products
These are just the items that other phone companies save a ton of money from for not doing and Apple is the one that gets called out for being the problem with the environment. Really? Wow. Makes me rethink what I thought about the UK.
Typical fanboy [despite what you claim] comment; I'll remind you two wrongs don't make a right. What does it matter what others do, the cristism was regarding what Apple does and that cannot be denied / defended. Everyone says Apple devices last longer, but if they do, why doesn't Apple back it up with the warranty they offer. I have had two devices that I took to Apple for the simplest fixes [or you would have thought] and they default position in both cases was buy new. I had an original iPod Touch where the headphone jack didn't work; it was about 15 months old and their proposal was to offer me 10% off a new one and "it wasn't worth repairing."
I had a 4th generation iPad, still in warranty. I purchased in Singapore duty-free, but the UK would not recognise the warranty and suggested I returned it on my next trip. The home button kept sticking and they said they wouldn't resolve it under warranty, but if I wanted to take it to a Apple authorised repair shop, they would authorise a 40% discounted repair, i.e. only £210 rather than £350 [I paid ~£369 for the device!]; if I wanted immediate rectification at the Apple store, they would give me 15% off a new iPad.
Apple are no worse than many others; they meet the expectations of a consumerism driven customer base.
I used to work for Siemens and we were always given Siemens mobiles and then that business was closed and explanation given was that they could not keep bringing out new models every quarter which was what their customers were expecting / demanding
Well we did create ARM. And the WWW. And the Computer.
Apple's advantage of durability/long term use has been slipping! 2012 Retina system was the start, limited RAM of 4GB and no means to upgrade, while the SSD could be. Then with the full lockdown with 2016 models and then the keyboard failures. It took Apple till 2019 to fix that mess, but the sleeper issue now hitting people is the displays T-CON boards breaking down from heat! Both poor design and no means to even replace the part which could be done if it was better thought out! 2016 onwards face this problem. 2019 models might be a bit better with the better cooling, but with newer hotter running Intel chips that may not have been enough.
Hopefully Apple sees this as a shot across the bow and addresses it in next years systems. Making a more repairable system as well as embracing a better parts access to independent service providers. So far its not very good.
Hopefully Apple sees this as a shot across the bow and addresses it in next years systems. Making a more repairable system as well as embracing a better parts access to independent service providers. So far its not very good.
Replaceable battery, storage expansion options, Memory upgrade options, serviceable parts (I could not get my late 2013 battery even last year from the authorised service centres due to sunset policy) are very much needed for me to come back to MacBook. Dell, HP, Lenova, MSI laptops have been providing these options.....It is silly to see Razr, Huawei, Xiomi copying MacBook Pro Style of solder & seal components to make the product look great....
Well, the truth is in the middle. Not being able to upgrade their newer products definitely requires to buy new devices more often (RAM, SSD), and is a disappointing development.
On the other hand, their devices remain usable much longer than their average competition!
On the other hand, their devices remain usable much longer than their average competition!