City of SF won't buy Macs without EPEAT certification

City of SF won't buy Macs without EPEAT certification


Read more

This is sad. Now with the 13" retina coming and a iMac later on, are all of theses Retina display Mac's not going to meet the Green signature that Apple have tried so hard to make.
I wonder how many more Companies/Cities will follow San Francisco ??

It seems like the only part of EPEAT that Apple won't be meeting is the "disassembly/maintenance" section. I don't see them changing their manufacturing materials.

RONE said:

It seems like the only part of EPEAT that Apple won't be meeting is the "disassembly/maintenance" section. I don't see them changing their manufacturing materials.

Click to expand...

Obviously SF have very stringent guidelines for there "Green Way of Life"

Good! SF can have fun without them! EPEAT is a fraud to begin with. They are an environmentalist data group that makes new technology decision limitations based on those who have a vested interest in the outcome of those limitations. EPEAT has grown into a group with so much power than anyone ever believed it would have. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to quickly imagine the negative side effects of that.

I know it is ridiculous that iPads and now MBPros are not recyclable, but even electronics that are recyclable don't really help in cleaning up the environment.

A lot of misconceptions about this story (not you guys' fault, the media have really gotten this one way wrong).

1. Apple's products are not now magically less environmentally-friendly than they were yesterday. They're all still EPEAT certified except for one: the Retina MacBook Pro. And all of them (including the RMBP) are Energy Star 5.2 (the highest standard) certified.

2. iPads are recycleable. EPEAT doesn't cover mobile devices like smartphones and iPads. Part of the problem with EPEAT is that its standards are old and incomplete. Apple actually EXCEEDS the government requirements on most areas of environmentally-friendly whatevers. The ONLY thing that's not meeting EPEAT as far as I can tell is the glued-in battery and low repairability of the RMBP. So this is mostly much ado about nothing.

3. As is so often the case, the media really should have waited to hear from both sides before jumping to conclusions. Read Apple's response and see if you still think they've fallen off the green wagon:

Apple discusses withdrawal from EPEAT certification | Electronista

Once again, I think this is more of a case of Apple being judged by higher standards than its competitors (and a bad case of jumping the gun).

We also have to remember the how simple these decisions are made once the rules are in place for a government or board:

Board member 1: the new MACs are not EPEAT

Board member 2: SF ordinance states that we cannot purchase an electronic item that does not have EPEAT certification

Board member 3: I move that MACS can no longer be purchased by SF.

Board member 1: I second.

Board member 3: All in favor say I.

Board member 3: motion passed in favor of banning the purchase of MACs due to them not being EPEAT certified.

Board member 1: Next item on the agenda.

Soylentgreen is completely correct. Apple isn't being singled out here. The reason for Apple withdrawing its products from the EPEAT registry doesn't particularly matter for San Francisco - they have a policy in place, and Apple choosing this course of action makes buying Apple computers with tax dollars no longer allowed according to that policy.

And San Francisco isn't the only municipality with such a policy. This move will see many municipalities, government agencies, schools and companies abandoning Apple unless they decide en masse to change their policies to no longer rely on EPEAT for purchasing standards anymore. So there are four possible outcomes:

1. Apple abandons a large chunk of the government, corporate and education markets for Macs
2. Apple changes its design direction to be more compliant with EPEAT
3. EPEAT changes its standards in such a way that Apple decides to back them again
4. EPEAT becomes less relevant as entities stop relying on EPEAT for purchasing policies

This conflict is between Apple and EPEAT - don't fault purchasers with existing policies for getting caught in the middle.

Go San Francisco!!

So good things can come from California.

Discerptor said:

Soylentgreen is completely correct. Apple isn't being singled out here. The reason for Apple withdrawing its products from the EPEAT registry doesn't particularly matter for San Francisco - they have a policy in place, and Apple choosing this course of action makes buying Apple computers with tax dollars no longer allowed according to that policy.

And San Francisco isn't the only municipality with such a policy. This move will see many municipalities, government agencies, schools and companies abandoning Apple unless they decide en masse to change their policies to no longer rely on EPEAT for purchasing standards anymore. So there are four possible outcomes:

1. Apple abandons a large chunk of the government, corporate and education markets for Macs
2. Apple changes its design direction to be more compliant with EPEAT
3. EPEAT changes its standards in such a way that Apple decides to back them again
4. EPEAT becomes less relevant as entities stop relying on EPEAT for purchasing policies

This conflict is between Apple and EPEAT - don't fault purchasers with existing policies for getting caught in the middle.

Click to expand...

As it turns out, there was a fifth possibility: Apple running back to EPEAT with its tail tucked between its legs.

Hooray a happy ending for rich people!

I just have to wonder...how did they just suddenly get back on? Wouldn't they have to remove a model for them to qualify? Slightly confused here...unless they "left" for future models. There has to be more to this. Maybe some compromise is being dealt with between the two.

I wish Apple would've stuck with their decision. Now it looks like they backed down too easily...unless, of course, EPEAT is changing some requirements.

EPEAT never rejected the Retina MacBook Pro to begin with. Apple just never submitted it. And honestly, I wasn't entirely sure why the Retina MacBook Pro wouldn't earn a Gold rating when even the MacBook Air has managed to consistently get one - needing to replace the entire topcase for a new battery is no more outlandish than needing to replace the entire topcase to replace the keyboard, which was already the case with the regular MacBook Pros.

MacRumors reported earlier that they would fail to meet criteria set by EPEATT, which is why they removed their products. They never said which specific model was the cause for failure, but hinted at at the MBP. That's why I was saying maybe the decision to get off EPEAT's list had more to do with future products than current ones. It wouldn't make sense to pull away right now if all your current products pass EPEAT certification. There's obviously more to this that probably is reported for lack of knowledge, so I won't speculate anymore.