Apple Recycling Old Macs for Free

charleste writes "CNN is reporting that Apple is going to recycle Macs for free. I wonder if this means they will actually recycle them in Cupertino, or sent overseas to be dumped as many 'recycled' computers do, or if they will actually mine them. And does this make the MacQuarium obsolete?"

Comments

I will do one better!

[crazyjeremy]

In other news, I will now recycle ANY piece of computer equipment for free. Simply get the device to me (in working order) and I will disassemble, dismember, shoot, melt, sell or attack it with a cowbell.

Re:I will do one better!

[joe 155]

I am also now offering a similar service, where I will just use the mac, hell, I'd even pay for the shipping... It seems like giving them away to people would be a far better way of getting rid of old, but still usable, computers... onyl recycle when they no longer work

Re:I will do one better!

[Darkon]

It seems like giving them away to people would be a far better way of getting rid of old, but still usable, computers

Not necessarily. Often these old machines are highly inefficient in terms of the computing power they provide vs the electricity they consume. Sure, having one of these at home would be cool - in fact I did used to use the next model down as my home server - but these days I just don't want to either pay the power bill or try to justify the waste of resources. Sometimes it really is better just to let this old kit go to silicon heaven.

Re:I will do one better!

[renoX]

I don't know sure, the old computer is less efficient than a new one, but once you take into account the energy used to *make* the new computer, I doubt that you saved energy, more likely you wasted energy.

Re:I will do one better!

[tomhudson]

Maybe they don't want a repeat of the old Mac Clone - where people cold take the custom bios chips out of a defunct mac and use it to legally run a clone made by Franklin Computer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_clones

a large amount of this system software was included in the Macintosh's ROM chips. Hence any competitor who attempted to create a Macintosh clone would have to either illegally duplicate all the copyrighted code in the ROMs -- in which case Apple could legally quash the manufacturer -- or reverse-engineer the ROMs, which would have been an enormous and costly process without certainty of success.

The strategy of suppressing clone development was successful; from 1986 to 1991, several manufacturers created Macintosh clones, obtaining their ROMs by actually purchasing one of Apple's Macintosh computers and removing from it the required parts, then installing those parts in the clone's case.

...

Before true clones were available, the Atari ST could be converted into a Mac by adding the third-party Spectre GCR emulator (which required that the user purchase a set of Mac ROMs). The Amiga could also be converted into a Mac with similar emulators. Since Apple Computer never manufactured a 68060 based Mac, the fastest way to run native 68000 MacOS applications on real hardware was to run it on an Atari or Amiga.

So your dead mac is worth money. Pull the roms, send the rest back.

Re:I will do one better!

[Bert64]

I still have an E450 running at home, 4x 480mhz cpus and 4gig ram... It's far cheaper than a modern system capable of handling the same kind of load. It may not be the best system for brute force processing, but it's very stable and will handle a high load easily.

Re:I will do one better!

[localman]

That doesn't sound right to me. Older machines often use less energy -- at least every time I've built a new machine over the past decade the power supply got bigger. Sure, they are less powerful too, but then they probably won't be used for the most modern computing tasks.

Aside from that, reuse is always more efficient than recycling. So if you can use something that has already been manufactured and shipped, instead of buying something new, go for it.

Cheers.

Re:I will do one better!

[Ohreally_factor]

Back before there were powerbooks (in fact before I was into Macs) there was a company that made Mac portables. The catch was that you had to remove the ROM and the CPU and install it into the laptop. Anyone remember the name of the company that sold these and what they were called?

Re:I will do one better!

[steveargonman]

If you're concerned about where Apple sill send them, you can always send them to Computer Drop Off and they're *gauranteed* to be recycled properly in Portland, OR. It's ran by a friend of mine.

Re:I will do one better!

[Mistlefoot]

I don't think this has to do with Mac Clones. I think this is just one way that Apple can continue to be progressive in their marketing.

Maybe I have a skewed view of the typical Mac user - but I consider them more progressive, open to new technologies and, well - maybe even more likely to be a vegetarian or drive an economical but classy car then a PC user.

You must remember that Microsoft won't be able to compete on this level - they don't make the hardware and likely won't recycle it for free. The average computer users sees Apple or Microsoft as the two choices. Maybe something like this will appeal to some undecided buyers.

Re:I will do one better!

[Anonymous Coward]

I still have an E450 running at home, 4x 480mhz cpus and 4gig ram... It's far cheaper than a modern system capable of handling the same kind of load. It may not be the best system for brute force processing, but it's very stable and will handle a high load easily.

In what way exactly is it "far cheaper" than an equivalent modern system? Surely not in terms of energy consumption. And surely not in terms of purchase cost, as one can easily buy a new, modern system that is more capable for less than one can purchase a used E450. A brand new system with 4GB ram that could smoke your E450 in every possible way can be had for $600.

Re:I will do one better!

[IANAAC]

It may not be the best system for brute force processing, but it's very stable and will handle a high load easily.

But really, how much high load do you really need at home, anyway?

Even if you're in the hosting business (and who in their right mind would do that from home?), throughput would be much more important than load.

I suppose you could be a computational chemist or doing bioinformatics stuff from home, but even then, I would think it would be cheaper to get a few x86 boxes and cluster them for compute power and it would still be less energy.

Re:I will do one better!

[jolshefsky]

Often these old machines are highly inefficient in terms of the computing power they provide vs the electricity they consume.

Yes, computing power-per-watt is less, but:

• Sometimes that's all the computing power someone needs. Further, using an older machine that requires less power (i.e. my Mac LCIII ran at about 20 watts versus 70 watts for my PowerBook) would therefore be more efficient.
• You also need to consider the energy and resources to dispose of the old machine. Don't forget about the non-dollar costs such as environmental damage -- even though it's "free" (i.e. my area; albeit through taxes) to put a computer in the garbage, there are other costs to consider.
• You also need to consider the energy and resources it takes to build the new machine. Plus you need to consider the resources to dispose of the new machine.

Taken together, I would bet that continuing to use an old machine would be more cost effective.

Re:I will do one better!

[1u3hr]

So your dead mac is worth money. Pull the roms, send the rest back.

10 years ago that was true. Now it's cheaper to buy a used G3 or G4 Mac entire than screw around with clones or emulation (if any of these are still sold at all) of an obsolete OS.

Re:I will do one better!

[outZider]

That would be the DynaMac. :)

Re:I will do one better!

[Dis*abstraction]

Well, I think she's hot. But it's been my experience that we Mac users go for the dark, sarcastic, chain-smoking brunettes instead of your typical ditzy Windows-using middle America blondes. Yeah, we think different like that.

Re:I will do one better!

[Jerf]

The energy used to make a computer is necessarily factored into its price; the manufacturers can't afford otherwise or they'd go out of business.

Therefore, you don't need to do very much fancy analysis to determine if it's worth buying a new computer or using an old one. If (cost of energy * expected use time for new computer + price of new computer) < (cost of energy * expected use time for old computer), then you're saving energy by buying a new one.

There are some externalities with the new computer, but if they added up to much they'd end up getting factored into the price again, most likely. (Most of the low-hanging fruit for internalizing externalities is gone.) You can minimize the externalities of trashing the old computer by recycling it. And thus the topic turns full circle...

Re:I will do one better!

[IntlHarvester]

A few points:

1) Franklin was an Apple II clone with pirated Apple firmware. Nothing to do with Macs

2) In the 68K days, many Macs came with ROMs socketed in SIMM slots, so they were very easy to remove and use in a clone system. At my university, these ROM SIMMs were frequently stolen by dasterdly Amigians and Atarians.

3) Some of the later official PPC clones had ROMs, but they were soldered on rather than socketed. At this point the ROM was basically a copy-protection dongle rather than something that saved cost.

4) I believe starting with MacOS 9, they removed the ROM requirement from the OS. Of course now they use TCPA for similar purposes.

Re:I will do one better!

[slashdot4win]

Often these old machines are highly inefficient in terms of the computing power they provide vs the electricity they consume.

Which is fine if you steal power from your neighbor.

Re:I will do one better!

[tomhudson]

So your dead mac is worth money. Pull the roms, send the rest back.

10 years ago that was true. Now it's cheaper to buy a used G3 or G4 Mac entire than screw around with clones or emulation (if any of these are still sold at all) of an obsolete OS.

Depends on what you want to do. Having a legit copy of the roms means being able to legitimately run emulators on todays hardware - a lot faster than a G3.

Re:I will do one better!

[Firehed]

There are a TON of people who still can't afford a new computer. They could deal with not running it 24/7 if it allowed their kids to do their homework.

Re:I will do one better!

[renoX]

You're right about the price of a computer includes the energy made to use it (and in Europe it also include the price to recycle it as this is rquired by the law).
But it's still very hard to do some evaluation: if you keep your old computer, when you have to buy a new one (because the old one doesn't work anymore), the new computer will be cheaper and use less energy than if you buy a computer now, your formula doesn't take this into account..

So it's quite difficult to compute, plus you don't know when your computer is going to die, and if it's the HDD you can exchange it..

Re:I will do one better!

[zakezuke]

Before true clones were available, the Atari ST could be converted into a Mac by adding the third-party Spectre GCR emulator (which required that the user purchase a set of Mac ROMs). The Amiga could also be converted into a Mac with similar emulators. Since Apple Computer never manufactured a 68060 based Mac, the fastest way to run native 68000 MacOS applications on real hardware was to run it on an Atari or Amiga.

--wiki

So your dead mac is worth money. Pull the roms, send the rest back.

That seems to be an odd thing to say. Atari near as i'm aware never came out with a stock 68060 pc. DCE "might" have some out with a 68060 based Amiga in the form of a a6000 but I have never met one. Either of these systems if it had a 68060 odds are really high it was a third party add on. Unless there simply were never any 68060 acceleracers for the Mac, and your application was limited to Mac applications, would it not make more sense to just get that rather than getting another platform that would also require surgery?

As for the ROMs, the emulators I met only required you dump the roms from a mac to run on either the Amiga or the Atari ST. The roms where just something that you kept to indicate you were not actually a filthy pirate, which few actually did.

Re:I will do one better!

[Aqua OS X]

But "recycling" computers is the epitome of wasting resources. Computers are, for the most part, a cradle to grave product. Very few components are successfully salvaged and recycled. What's left generates e-waste in the form of components that are dumped and or incinerated. And typically this is done cheaply overseas via people who do not aim to contain the toxicity of dumped materials or build high efficiency incinerators which limit pollutants.

Then there is the energy that is consumed during this process. Salvaging, recycling, and incinerating all require energy. Moreover, since most computer parts are junked, new raw materials are needed to build new computers... and that requires energy.

If you look at the big picture, making use of old hardware is a smart idea.

Re:I will do one better!

[Alioth]

Most people hardly use the computing power of a late-90s Mac (typing letters and reading email and browsing the web is hardly CPU intensive) so the lower overall wattage of the machine will mean it's more energy efficient. CPU instructions per watt is pretty irrelevant unless you really are using the processing power, and not having the computer sitting waiting on I/O all the time.

Re:I will do one better!

[petermgreen]

that kind of ananlysis works for servers etc

but you can't put more than one machine on a desktop generally (you can but it requires quite advanced trickery). So if they don't need more power than the old machine provides and the old machine isn't some insanely power hogging server then I don't see the issue.

Re:I will do one better!

[cpt kangarooski]

Outbound did this, and there was also the Dynamac.

Re:I will do one better!

[Jerf]

if you keep your old computer, when you have to buy a new one (because the old one doesn't work anymore), the new computer will be cheaper and use less energy than if you buy a computer now, your formula doesn't take this into account..

While I'm hardly going to pretend that that formula is some sort of magic formula that completely encapsulates the reasoning behind whether you should buy a new computer, even if only for energy reasons, you're actually wrong that I don't cover that case. That's part of what the word "expected" means.

If you plan on using the computer for two years, after which there is a 100% chance you'll discard it, but there's a 50% chance it'll break after exactly one year, that's an expected use of a year and a half.

This example uses discrete numbers for concreteness. In reality calculated expected use times would involve intergrating under continuous curves, but I don't care to try to explain that all in a Slashdot post.

Now, that said, you're right that it's not necessarily easy to do an evaluation of "expected use time", but that's because life is complicated and there's not much you can do about that. Fortunately, I find such computations for old computers is actually not that hard; since component failure tends to follow a Poisson distribution, generally if your computer has made it to "old" it's more likely to continue on longer, so the random probabilities can be considered smaller than for a new machine, and after three or four years, you can pretty much estimate the probability of failure of the old machine at zero, unless it's giving you signs it's flaky or going to fail. It's wrong, but it's close enough.

Re:I will do one better!

[sevensharpnine]

Maybe I have a skewed view of the typical Mac user[...]
 
What makes you say that? Your views are perfectly in line with what Apple's marketing team wants you to think.

Re:I will do one better!

[tomhudson]

Just a quick point - unsoldering a ROM is no big deal. Heck, when the cpu blew on my first computer, I had to unsolder it and solder in a new one. I guess that's becoming one of the "lost arts."

Re:I will do one better!

[timeOday]

Even one modern x86 would easily whoop that box. The processors aren't especially fast, even for 400 mhz.

Re:I will do one better!

[IntlHarvester]

Sure, but a soldered ROM probably would have killed the commercial viability of those Amiga addon boards.

Re:I will do one better!

[tomhudson]

You unsolder it, clean up the leads, and plug into the socket :-) When I replaced the cpu, I thought about soldering a socket to the motherboard and seating the chip into it, but it was just as easy to solder a new cpu directly to it.

Re:I will do one better!

[TClevenger]

My Powerbook G4/867 runs at 14 watts at idle with the hard drive spinning and the screen at its dimmest setting. It can go up to 32 watts at 66% CPU with the optical drive running. At that speed, it can finish any task in a tiny fraction of the time needed for an LCIII, and can quickly return to idle.

Old equipment without power-saving features doesn't necessarily save anything over modern equipment.

Re:I will do one better!

[Ohreally_factor]

OUTBOUND! That's what I was thinking of. Thanks!

Re:I will do one better!

[GaryPatterson]

ROMs? What ROMs?

Apple changed the OS away from ROMs about six or seven years ago. Or was it mid-90s? Any Mac with a ROM is so old that it's probably best recycled anyway.

Re:I will do one better!

[derubergeek]

A brand new system with 4GB ram that could smoke your E450 in every possible way can be had for $600.

After adding in the dual-redundant power supplies, LOM (lights out management), 20 hot-swappable drive bays, and the ability to distribute Oracle processes across multiple processors, I'm thinking your figure is just a touch on the low side.

Re:I will do one better!

[Hes Nikke]

where do you get your figures? i've never seen a way to measure overall power draw of a system (only temperature of various components) without getting out the multimeter.

i would seriously like to know. i love seeing those kinds of statistics, especially in real time!

Re:I will do one better!

[Buran]

I have an old Mac you're welcome to. If you're serious, you're quite welcome to it. It's late 68K or early PPC era (not at home now, can't check the model info) but I really do want it out of the basement and I'd prefer to give it to someone who really wants it even over the local e-recycling dropoff.

Re:I will do one better!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think I buy this...you have to assume that everyone uses all the horsepower available in the box, and except for gamers and users of compute-intensive technical applications, most of that power is going unused. Hell, just the graphics processor in many of the new machines consumes more wattage than an entire system of a few years ago.

Re:I will do one better!

[TClevenger]

I use a Kill-A-Watt meter. It displays volts, amps and watts in realtime, and has a kilowatt counter built-in.

I used it to replace a server in my house (old server: HP Vectra VLi8 PIII-650, 46 watts idle, new server: Toshiba Tecra 8100 PIII-650 laptop, 15 watts idle), and find some surprising waste, such as a set of Boston Acoustics speakers that drew a continuous 40 watts, even when "turned off", and my HP Laserjet 2100, which draws 13-16 watts in powersave mode. (The speakers are now on a power strip, and the printer gets switched off when I'm done with it.)

Re:I will do one better!

[dsmall]

I did the Atari Mac emulator. The really hard part was reading the variable speed (GCR code) Mac disks on the steady speed Atari disk drive.

It's funny that no one mentions that you could just go buy these ROM parts from Apple dealers if you wanted them.

I don't understand the above reference to the "68060 based Mac". I've never heard of such a critter from anyone (emulator or not). 68040 was the furthest I ever saw.

I would appreciate it if someone would tell, someday, why Motorola could not crank up the 68060 to the ungodly clock rates that Intel achieved. I've always wondered.


Thanks,

Dave Small

Re:I will do one better!

[Hes Nikke]

sweet... i'll have to get me one of those some time... how hackable are they? can i collect the data into a computer? that'd rock!

Re:I will do one better!

[joe 155]

(I'm assuming that your american) That is a really generous offer and I'd love to be able to take it up but i'm one of the minorities here who is english. That kinda means that any potential gain for the environment would be more than lost by having to ship it and I don't have any US dollars in an account that I can write a cheque for so it would be quite hard to pay for postage aswell, but thanks for the offer, maybe your local school might be interested?

Re:I will do one better!

[tomhudson]

I wondered about the 68x series myself. It was a great chip to program for. I would have been quite willing to sacrifice (apparent) speed for all those extra registers, no segmented memory architecture, and more addressing modes.

Re:I will do one better!

[mdwh2]

DCE "might" have some out with a 68060 based Amiga in the form of a a6000 but I have never met one.

There certainly was a 68060 based Amiga - the A4000T, which was available in 68040 and 68060 versions ( http://www.amigau.com/aig/a4000t.html ).

Unless there simply were never any 68060 acceleracers for the Mac

Well, were there? I never heard of any, but I may be wrong. It seems quite plausible that there weren't any, as Apple had switched to PowerPC by then.

Re:I will do one better!

[Bert64]

And where might i find a system with 4GB of ram for $600?

Re:I will do one better!

[ThatFunkyMunki]

You're a complete dumbass. You lose at the internet.

Re:I will do one better!

[Dis*abstraction]

Sorry to hear your girlfriend's fat and blonde, but hey, you sound like you're from Los Angeles; you two should make a perfect pair.

Re:I will do one better!

[TClevenger]

I've never seen one personally, but this seems to have what you're looking for.

Re:I will do one better!

[bjb]

There certainly was a 68060 based Amiga - the A4000T, which was available in 68040 and 68060 versions ( http://www.amigau.com/aig/a4000t.html ).

OK, lets try to set this straight.

Commodore never released a 68060 based machine. The highest was the 68040 based A4000, which I believe hit 25MHz stock. They may have had things in R&D, but they never saw the light of day.

If you wanted a faster machine, 3rd parties created boards with 33, 40 and 50MHz 68040 CPUs.

In one of the later iterations of Amiga's technology ownership (Escom, Gateway, etc) there was possibly a 68060 based machine (the A4000T refererenced). However, not many - if any - of these machine ever made it to normal consumers.

There were a few companies that created 68060 accelerators for A2000, A3000 and A4000 machines. These typically ran at 50 or 66MHz. Everything worked, however, there was at least one library patch for the OS necessary and the 060 processor caused a few problems with older software. Some of these accelerators also supported a PowerPC chip as well (601/603 variety, probably), as Amiga folks were following Apple's lead here.

I never saw a 68060 based Amiga, but they existed. Unfortunately they also commanded a high price (I believe several hundred dollars) because, I would assume, the rarity of the chip. I am fairly confident that the 68060 was never produced in any significant quantity. There was never a 68050 (at least for the public).

MacAquarium

[Alcimedes]

That was one of the best things to do with an SI. I used to make them somewhat regularly, they were fun and great conversation pieces. Plus they were the perfect size for a college desk.

Re:MacAquarium

[macboygrey]

They're incredible. I was determined to build on, but it took me about 3 months to bring myself to gut the *working* SE (FDHD) that someone gave me for the project... it looks good though: http://www.mac-boy.com/fishtank.jpg

Re:MacAquarium

[tverbeek]

The Macquarium SE on my desk (I do tech support at an art school) is easily the most-commented-about aspect of my office decor... which also includes several paintings, photographs, and other works of art I've created. {shrug}

My other recycling project is upgrading a Mac SE to run OS X. Nothing terribly challenging, just an SVGA 9" CRT and a Mac Mini mounted inside. The best part of that is the "Mac SE X" nameplate on the front. {grin}

Of course Macquaria are really tangential to the question of Mac recycling, since the components most in need of special disposal (CRT, circuit boards) are discarded in the process of making one, regardless.

Re:MacAquarium

[Blakey Rat]

Out of curiousity, where do you get a 9" CRT with decent resolution? I think it would be easier to find a LCD, since those are going in mini-DVD players and in-car video all the time. Sounds like a cool project, though... I might rip you off and make my own.

Re:MacAquarium

[tverbeek]

My initial plan was to use an LCD, but I couldn't find one the right size and shape. Most of the LCDs being made in the 9-10" range are "widescreen" format, and/or overpriced touch screens. I finally went with a same-size monochrome CRT, to keep the original look of the system, and to draw out the "wait, how did you..." reaction a little longer from those who realize instinctively that there's no way OS X could ever run on a stock SE. ("Well, I had to piggyback a G4 upgrade card on top of a PowerPC replacment CPU, but the hard part was converting the memory addressing bus from kilobytes to megabytes...")

The CRT I found (eBay) does 800x600 and was originally designed for use on point-of-sale computers. I would've prefered 1024x768, but that'd be pretty tiny on a 9" screen, so it wasn't a great loss settling for mere SVGA. And since I'll be using it mainly as a file/web server, a relative low-res display isn't really a problem.

By the way, I used an original G4 Mini instead of the new Intel units to maintain compatibility with Classic apps that really would run on an original SE. I'm hoping to fool at least one person into thinking that it's an SE hacked to do greyscale, before I close Photoshop 3.0 and show him it's running on OS X.

None of the above

[GarfBond]

Or, more than likely, sent overseas to be mined.

Not about being green

[DAldredge]

This isn't about being green, it is about removing older macs from the 2nd hand market. The exact same reason that HP offers a similar program.

Re:Not about being green

[anonicon]

This isn't about being green, it is about removing older macs from the 2nd hand market. The exact same reason that HP offers a similar program.

OK. As long as it achieves the same effect, whether by some altruistic concern for the environment or through sheer greed, it's all good. Besides, it helps the individual Mac resllers who will be able to maintain a greater profit margin on used equipment due to less product glut on the open market.

Chuck

Re:Not about being green

[Anonymous Coward]

If someone can sell their mac in the second-hand market, why would they give it to Apple for free? Your criticism makes no sense.

Re:Not about being green

[moo083]

Not exactly. They don't just take Macs. They take any old computer. Theoretically, if you still wanted to use your old computer, you could give them the computer that was the old one before you got the new one. At some point, you'll want to get rid of the old one. It seems really wierd right now, but at some point, its likely that I will want to recycle this Macbook Pro in front of me. Precisely, it will likely be in six years, which is three years after I buy my next computer.

Re:Not about being green

[Ohreally_factor]

It's Saturday, you don't have to sip the anti-koolaid today.

What you wrote might be true if the program was restricted to recycling old Macs. This program covers any computer; the only requirement is that you purchase a new Mac to participate. More details. More info.

HP, AFAIK, charges a small fee to recycle your computer.

If you're going to slag on companies, at least get your info straight. Then you'll have some factual basis for your cynicism.

Re:Not about being green

[irc.goatse.cx troll]

In 6 years, I'd probably still take it assuming its still working. :(

Re:Not about being green

[Ohreally_factor]

Judging by the way the used Mac market works currently, in six years you can probably sell it for $300 - $500. OTOH, if you have a G3 product or a sub Ghz G4, it probably won't be worth your while to sell. Higher speed G4s will be borderline, and G5s will probably still be worth something, despite the transition to Intel.

Re:Not about being green

[Jeffrey Baker]

The dividing line seems to be which computers can run the latest Mac OS X and which cannot. The Pismo model PowerBook G3 is still relatively valuable (about $400) while the older models of the same laptop, which have the same CPU but lack FireWire ports and cannot run Tiger, are worth rather less.

Re:Not about being green

[fm6]

That might well be a factor. But it's also true that the cost of recycling old hardware is a big disincentive to upgrade.

Re:Not about being green

[Ohreally_factor]

Yes, that is true, although there is a free patch that will let you run OS X on some older hardware. Not surprisingly, this patch is distributed by OWC, a company that sells upgrades for Macs.

I think that the transition to Intel CPUs will be another such dividing line. If you buy a non-intel Mac the day before that model goes to Intel, your resale value down the road will be considerably less than if you waited a day.

Re:Not about being green

[OhHellWithIt]

I don't think so. I think it's about short-circuiting a shareholder proposal mentioned in the FA. I own a small amount of Apple stock, and I read the shareholder proxy info. It really ticked me off. The proxy certificate only permitted shareholders the option of voting on whether a shareholders group would be allowed to present a recycling proposal at the shareholders meeting. Not "Vote yes or no on a recycling proposal", but "Shall we allow these shareholders present a proposal at the meeting?". Naturally, the board of directors recommended against this. (For some reason, boards of directors are always against anything that isn't their idea.)

It is possible that the shareholders group is proposing something more far-reaching than what was just announced. But I'm happy to see Apple taking this step. Dell is willing to take in my junk PC and recycle it, and I think HP is willing to also, so why not Apple?

recycling...

[SolusSD]

what all is involved in recycling a computer? I know there is quite a bit of lead on the circuit boards that needs to be handled properly, but what exactly do they do with it?

Re:recycling...

[Anonymous Coward]

but what exactly do they do with it?

put it on Ebay

100,000 computers at 10$ each is a nice profit

Re:recycling...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not too worried about the lead, since it's not particularly toxic and is quite safe to handle, with the exception of a few chemical compounds that contain lead. I'm worried about the dopants used in the ICs, the glaze on PC board, and the extremely dangerous phosphorus contained inside the CRTs.

That said, my vote is for dumping, since it would be more wasteful and polluting, energy-wise, to reduce the electronics to usable stock of "raw" materials. Aside from that, I know of at least one company that reduces the electronics to parts, and sells them. So it's quite do-able, however, the broken parts still get dumped.

Re:recycling...

[jrmcferren]

Removing the lead is only a small part. Computers usually go through the following process, although this is a large educated guess this should be somewhat accurate.

1. Working systems and parts are donated to charity.
2. Parts that don't work or are too old are usually taken apart to get the precious metals and dangerous stuff out.
3a. If the component is a PC board the copper and lead are recycled or the lead is properly handled.
3b. If the component is an IC it is stripped to get the valuable gold out.
3c. If the component is a battery it is handled accordingly. (I have a nice collection of CR2032s)
3d. If the component is a CRT the tube is recycled accordingly. Very few CRTs are all new.
4. The materials are sold as raw materials and a small (or large) profit is made.

As a rule I require the following things to be reused:

Any part that can be reused in the foreseeable future. For some commercial applications this may even include 386/486 computers for diskless workstations.

As a rule I require the following things to be recycled:

Lead Acid Batteries because it is the LAW!
Nickle Cadmium Batteries (I don't practice this as much as I like)

I don't work for a business or any kind, I am a home user and support my mom's computer habits. (Very Stressful especally when our mice operate on the same channel and will not change)

Re:recycling...

[jridley]

I don't know about Apple's program, but in general electronics "recycling" involves shipping them to some impoverished country where people making practically nothing remove chips from boards by burning them over a coal fire to melt the lead/tin solder.
As you can imagine, these people are not exactly working in healthy conditions. In fact, the report I was listening to recently said that the operations were polluting the area so badly that this little village by a river had to start importing bottled water because the river was now poisonous. It's also likely that the ground will be unable to support crops for hundreds of years (until the toxins ALL wash into the river and downstream to poison some other places).
All in all, you're probably better dumping the stuff in a landfill here. At least in the US, landfills are contained areas that are monitored and controlled. Send them to a "recycler" and they'll get released into the environment in the worst possible ways.

Re:recycling...

[parvin]

Perhaps you were listening to one of NPR's excellent reports on the environmental costs of electronics "recycling". You can read or listen here

Re:recycling...

[boingo82]

All in all, you're probably better dumping the stuff in a landfill here.

Apple tried that already when in 1989 they dumped about 2700 Apple Lisas in a Utah landfill, because the tax writeoff was better that way than if they donated them to charity.

This came from Steve

[thatguywhoiam]

I'll bet this is a directive from SJ. He's a pretty green dude.

I remember a quote from him once, pretty excellent example of Steve Jobs' mentality actually. It was both very poetic and utterly ridiculous. This was from back in the early Apple days before he was fired by Scully. He said (paraphrasing), 'I want a computer factory that takes raw beach sand in one end and outputs fully assembled Macs from just that raw material.' What a crazy, wonderful idea.

Re:This came from Steve

[minitual]

That wasn't Steve talking...that was the acid.

Re:This came from Steve

[tverbeek]

'I want a computer factory that takes raw beach sand in one end and outputs fully assembled Macs from just that raw material.'

Great, so there goes another ecologically important wildlife habitat and economically important tourism attraction! :)

Re:This came from Steve

[wolfponddelta]

What would be perfect is to figure out a way to shove the annoying tourists into one end of a machine and get computers out the other. Not only would this be a worthwhile cause, but it would also save the beaches from the trash and destruction tourists leave in their wake.

Re:This came from Steve

[Overly Critical Guy]

Steve Jobs also said during their recent shareholder meeting that they accept any PCs, not just Macs, in this recycling program. "We also take switchers."

Re:This came from Steve

[1u3hr]

'I want a computer factory that takes raw beach sand in one end and outputs fully assembled Macs from just that raw material.' What a crazy, wonderful idea.

Now we need a factory that takes old fully assembled Macs and produces raw beach sand.

Old Computers are a Gold Mine

[coffeecan]

Literally. There is more gold per-ton in old computer parts than gold ore, and its cheaper to extract. so it makes sense given the recent rise of precious metals for apple to salvage as much of these resources as possible. This Free program is probably going to turn a profit.

Re:Old Computers are a Gold Mine

[shashi]

Very true. There are also a lot of metals besides gold that are worth more (though in smaller amounts, like platinum). I've been part of a business before where we chunked up old Macs and PCs, packed all the circuit boards up in huge wooden crates, and sent them off to a recovery mill... a couple months later, a few tons of scrap is turned into a check for $20,000. It's not bad money but it takes a lot of manual labor to separate it out (i.e. separating circuits from CRT's and plastic) or the mill will charge you to do the separation and sorting.

Also, newer computers have much lower amounts of these materials, making them almost worthless. The sweet spot are the 68020's and 486's (the heavy processors are where you get the most precious metals per oz.).

Re:Old Computers are a Gold Mine

[isaacklinger]

1. sell computers
2. get them back for free
3. harvest precious metals
4. ???
5. iBling!

Re:Old Computers are a Gold Mine

[Anonymous Coward]

When I first heard about people recycling computers and trying to extract the gold and such I was rather doubtful. Then one of my friends got a job helping to build a gold mine in Alaska. Seems they take ton after ton after ton of dirt (from which you probably coudn't even find the gold with your bare hands) then run it through a centrifuge. I asked him if he thought they were actually going to make a profit off of digging up all this dirt, carting it along a conveyer belt and into a centrifuge just to extract gold. He said he didn't think so, but obviously they wouldn't bother building all of that if it didn't work.

So thinking in that context, it's easy to imagine that a few thousand computers really is a "goldmine" by modern standards.

batteries

[minus_273]

Apple has been doing this with batteries for years. If you have old batteries from apple products, just take them to the apple store and they will take them off your hands for you. This is a much better option than sending it to a landfill.

Re:batteries

[joe 155]

The batteries are one of the worst parts of a laptop for the environment, of course all batteries are pretty bad if not disposed of properly - you really have to watch out for the cadium ones, just one can contaminate about 10,000 litres of water

Re:batteries

[pauljlucas]

If you have old batteries from apple products, just take them to the apple store and they will take them off your hands for you.

They used to do even better than that. You could call and order a refurbished battery for about half the price of a new battery, plus you'd send them back your old battery in the box with a pre-paid label.

Unfortunately, I wanted to take advantage of this again, but it seems the ability to buy refurbished batteries from Apple is no longer possible. (I spent about 20 minutes on the phone with an Apple rep. and he couldn't find anything; nor is there anything on Apple's web site about it.) :-(

Obsolete?

[oneiros27]

No, no... cost more...

When there are less items available on the market, the value increases if there's still a demand for it. (if there's no demand, then the value's effectively 0)

The conspiracy theorist would assume that Apple's trying to corner the market on MacQuariums, and they need more spare parts, so they're tricking people into giving them the parts under the assumption of 'recycling' (which it is). They might even have a company that's willing to buy lots of thousands of these for the very purpose. (pbfixit comes to mind)

They might also find that it's more cost effective to strip and refurb some machines than to have new parts manufactured for those with extended warranties. (this assumes that the product is on the market long enough for people to recycle out of warranty machines while other people still have them under warranties)

why not...

[radicalnerd]

donate them to poor urban schools, or third world countries?
[like that'll happen, but it's an idea anyway]

Re:why not...

[flobberchops]

Do YOU do that with your old HardDrives, Keyboards, Mice and any other component you upgrade?

Re:why not...

[saintlupus]

donate them to poor urban schools, or third world countries?

Urban schools have plenty of technology, thanks to programs like E-rate. What they don't have is people to set it up, whether it's old junk like this or brand new machines. Take a walk around a typical city school some time; it's enlightening.

(I live in Buffalo, not an exceptionally wealthy city by any means.)

--saint

Re:why not...

[Anonymous Coward]

two reasons against that, basically:
1) shipping costs and customs charges
2) lawsuits & liability

A lot of 'third world' countries have HUGE tariffs on the imported computer equipment. Russia in the early 1990's here comes to mind, where it was actually cheaper to pay for a round-trip ticket to America and buy a laptop there than to import it into Russia and pay all the customs fees

Re:why not...

[c_forq]

umm... power? I computer is useless without power. You think those in poverty want a higher electricity bill (assuming they even have electricity)? Also assuming they are able to get electricity, what are the chances it will be quality enough to allow the system to run well (many poor places have varying voltage and current, and frequent blackouts).

Re:why not...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because poor urban schools and 3rd world countries don't want useless junk.

Re:why not...

[multimediavt]

donate them to poor urban schools, or third world countries? [like that'll happen, but it's an idea anyway]

It does happen, but that's passing the ecological disaster on, and not dealing with it.

Re:why not...

[Anonymous Coward]

Urban schools have plenty of technology, thanks to programs like E-rate. What they don't have is people to set it up, whether it's old junk like this or brand new machines. Take a walk around a typical city school some time; it's enlightening.

What they don't have is basic literacy, and all the technology in the world can't change that.

Re:why not...

[Illbay]

I don't know about the rest of the world, but here in the U.S., "poor urban schools" aren't really very poor.

For example, the District of Columbia spends $12,801 per student, about 150% of the national average. You can bet the school administrators in D.C. would sneer at your offer to give them obsolete old computers.

There is a negative correlation regarding amount of spending on schools, urban or "rural," poor vs. middle class. This is the result of decades of throwing money at the problem at the behest of the REAL beneficiaries of school funding, the education bureaucrats.

In contrast, you have states like North Dakota, spending $7,727 per pupil, yet the rate of H.S. graduation and achievment test scores in North Dakota DWARFS that of D.C.

Private schools' average tuition is about $8,000 per pupil per year in urban areas, and their graduation success rates are far beyond those of the urban publc schools in the same areas.

You want to help "poor urban students"? Get behind efforts to strengthen marriage and family. You'll do a lot more good there than pitching recycled computers to them.

Re:why not...

[saintlupus]

What they don't have is basic literacy, and all the technology in the world can't change that.

Nope. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that the students would be better off with teachers who weren't so distracted by technology. I teach Computer Science at a college level, and the vast majority of the time, all that's necessary is a chalkboard and some books. I can't see why an elementary school reading class would require more than that.

Throwing computers into a classroom with no funding for IT staff, and no money to train the teachers to use them, is far more harm than good.

--saint

Re:why not...

[v1]

A lot of schools used to accept old computers from locals, but now that's changing. Too many people are using schools and soforth to dump 386 and mac classics on their doorstep. They're a school for god's sake. We want them to teach our children how to use computers that won't be obsolete when they graduate... let alone obsolete while they are still in school.

Most schools now don't accept anything below a certain point technology-wise. The limit on PCs seems to be P2 or higher. The limit on macs seems to be G3/G4 or later. Anything else quite frankly wastes their time and classroom space, and in the end they just have to throw it away themselves and you've done them a disservice by giving it to them. The school I work at has a storage room upstairs with about three dozen PowerMacs and 486's in it. The teachers from the kindergarden are the only ones that will touch them, because they still have acres of educational and kids games for software for those antiques. And if one breaks, won't boot, catches on fire, or looks funny, *shrug* throw it away, and haul another one down from storage. Quick and easy maintenance!

ever so timely and accurate

[DynamoJoe]

A little research is a wonderful thing
. Ahh, /. All the news that's fit to print several days ago.

Re:ever so timely and accurate

[Ohreally_factor]

CUPERTINO, California--April 21, 2006--Apple® today announced an expansion of its successful recycling program. . . .

More like a week ago.

Is this big news? I dunno. I guess it's a good thing.

A rebate would grease them skids!

[phorest]

Wow, why not a rebate of say 100.00 to make a user switch from win-ux and just fill a warehouse with the junk.

When it's full they can have a new ad campaign with bulldozers loading barges with all the junk and crow about how many people switched. They could probably write it all off as marketing costs and sell more hardware to boot!. Apple wins!

Reuse rather than recycle

[Larry Lightbulb]

If the machines are still working, then reusing them is going to be better than ripping them apart for the gold.

Staying in the US

[bizard]

At the announcement, Jobs specifically said that the recycling would all be done in the U.S. and not just shipped off to China.

Re:Staying in the US

[ThatsNotFunny]

So much for sending the dead computers back to the place where they were born.

In other news

[almostmanda]

Ford will recycle your old car....for free! As soon as your Mustang gets a few scuffs on it and you want a brand new one, bring it in and they will take it off your hands and crush it into a cube! At absolutely no cost to you! Wow, what an amazingly environmentally conscious company!

Seriously, apple has a vested interest in keeping people buying new computers, not used ones. Most major computer manufacturers have this sort of program, and it amazes me that some people think that because THEY have no use for their computer, no one does, and it has to be destroyed somehow. I know a lot of those morons would just throw it in the garbage otherwise, but still--let's not celebrate Apple for being a different, progressive company. They're not doing anything special.

Re:In other news

[c_forq]

A few points:
1)This isn't only Apple computers, they will recycle computers made by anyone.
2)I'm sure if the computer has value people will sell it. I put an old 486 up on EBay before (working Pentium system). No one even bid a dollar on it, something like that has no value on the market I could find, if this program was around then I would have recycled it, but it ended up going into the trash.

Re:In other news

[Arcady13]

Of course no one bid on it, if you listed it as a 486 that was a working Pentium. Since that description makes no sense (a 486 and a Pentium are two different processors) nobody wanted to guess what you were really selling and take the risk. Most failed eBay auctions are the result of poor descriptions and a lack of photos.

Re:In other news

[v1]

I would imagine that it's harder to recycle a car than it is to recycle a computer. Though you probably get a lot more materials out of a car than out of a computer. Precious metals seem to be the only attraction in electronics, whereas cars have rubber, aluminum, steel, glass, and some plastics that can all be reused, and the pieces are in bigger chunks, making separation easier. Ever tried to take apart a capacitor to recycle it? ;)

Overseas and dumped is my bet...

[Super Dave Osbourne]

I want in my heart to believe that companies in general do the right thing, but what makes the most sense is the economics of recycling. A good portion of all things recycled actually go to landfills. My guess and bet is that the system in place, the path of least resistance is the one that once out of Apple's hands will be employed to hand the Macs being 'recycled'.

Re:Overseas and dumped is my bet...

[shawb]

If this is done properly (Which is much more likely if the actual recycling is done in the U.S. as Apple claims) this is a lot better than just dumping your old gear in the trash. A fair amount of the heavy metals can be expected to be stripped out for reuse, those parts which are not economically recyclable will be divided into two parts: general waste which is disposed of at any old landfill, and toxic materials which are disposed of at designated facilities that monitor groundwater perfusion, etc. But if the old parts are shipped off to a third world nation, chances are the end result will be less environmentally friendly than just dumping the old gear in the trash for the garbage man to deal with.

Re:Overseas and dumped is my bet...

[Anonymous Coward]

If this is done properly (Which is much more likely if the actual recycling is done in the U.S. as Apple claims)

what are you implying? [honest question]

Re:Overseas and dumped is my bet...

[shawb]

Some "recycling" companies ship the old parts out to third world countries, where the boards are essentially burned over an open fire to melt off the more valuable metals. This releases PCBs and other really nasty chemicals which are just allowed to burn right out into the atmosphere. The ash is then just dumped, often into an open landfill where more other toxic chemicals are leached out into the water supply. I have no idea WHICH companies do this or anything but this practice, while not necesarilly common, is not unheard of.

Environmental monitoring is much more strict in the US (and presumably just about any developed country/region) so these things really don't happen. But at least shipping the old computer parts off satisfies the local NIMBYs, giving the "recycling" companies a green image and a decent profit.

Re:Overseas and dumped is my bet...

[v1]

Even if we assume a large portion of the recycled product is disposed of, there are still some advantages to it. First off of course, is that a certain percentage IS recycled and reused. That alone should be incentive, Where recyclingg is concerned, "some" is better than "none". Second, in the process of recycling, they are breaking down the unit into smaller pieces. A good example would be cars... they take out the interiors, the engine block, tires, etc, sure there's a lot letf over. But then they crush it into a cube. It's still the same amount of waste, but it's in a smaller package now so it doesn't fill up the landfills as quickly.

Apple recycling old COMPUTERS for free

[BearRanger]

Not just Macs. Steve Jobs' quote at the shareholders meeting was something like: "We like switchers too."

They'll recycle PCs too

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve Jobs said during the shareholders' meeting that they'd also recycle PCs, not only Macs. You just need to buy a Mac before they'll take your old computer.

Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition vs. Apple

[reporter]

DAldredge (2353) incorrectly stated, "This isn't about being green, ..." On the contrary, the CNN report mentioned in the lead article starting this thread of discussion talks explicitly about recycling.

How has Apple handled recycling?

According to the "The 2005 Computer Report Card" by the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, "Apple, Dell, Gateway, and HP are the companies that use recyclers that have signed the Electronic Recyclers Pledge of Stewardship. To learn more about the Recycler Pledge go to: http://www.svtc.org///cleancc/recycle/recycler_ple dge.htm".

In that report, note that Apple received the second highest score in the category of "DISPOSAL CHAIN". That category indicates the degree to which a company will audit the entire disposal chain (including work sub-contracted to suspicious companies in China, Taiwan Province, and Korea) to ensure that recycling of old computer equipment is done in accordance with the most ethical, most responsible practices.

Note that Apple management actually signed the Electronics Recycler's Pledge of True Stewardship, committing to the gold standard of ethical, responsible recycling.

Finally, the recent decision by Apple management to take back old equipment for free is probably due to the tireless efforts of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC) and other groups in the Computer TAKE-BACK Campaign (CTBC). When Steve Jobs gave the keynote speech at the 2005 graduation ceremony at Stanford University, CTBC flew a banner over the ceremony. The banner exclaimed, "STEVE - DON'T BE A MINI PLAYER - RECYCLE ALL E-WASTE".

Re:Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition vs. Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

reporter (666905) wrote "On the contrary, the CNN report mentioned in the lead article starting this thread of discussion talks explicitly about recycling."

He believes everything he reads.

Re:Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition vs. Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

According to the "The 2005 Computer Report Card [svtc.org]" by the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, "Apple, Dell, Gateway, and HP are the companies that use recyclers that have signed the Electronic Recyclers Pledge of Stewardship.

Well, why didn't they say that up front then? I mean, if they signed a PLEDGE and all, they must be above board. My god, it's a PLEDGE. How impressive.

In that report, note that Apple received the second highest score in the category of "DISPOSAL CHAIN". That category indicates the degree to which a company will audit the entire disposal chain (including work sub-contracted to suspicious companies in China, Taiwan Province, and Korea) to ensure that recycling of old computer equipment is done in accordance with the most ethical, most responsible practices.

Being ranked "second highest" doesn't mean shit. No company wants to officially know what happens to the waste they're shipping out. The "second highest" audit score probably just means that they asked the recyclers to "cross your heart and hope to die" when they swore to uphold their PLEDGE. When I read bullshit press releases so full of obvious deception, I often wonder who they think is gullible enough to be fooled. Now I know: it's people like you.

Re:Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition vs. Apple

[Kirth Gersen]

I was in a computer store today in Phnom Penh Cambodia, lined with second-hand PCs. Many seemed to be from Japan -- the laptops almost all had Japanese keyboards -- but I noticed one Dell which still had a property sticker from a clinic in California.

It was on sale for about 100 USD. These old boxes -- usually something like a PIII/433/128/10G -- still have a market here.

What's going to happen to the piles of old inkjet printers that the store also had for sale is another question.

They'll recycle your Dell too

[Anonymous Coward]

They are offering to recycle any PC... and they are doing it for free, and properly. They have earned accolades from the Sierra Club for this plan.

Not just Macs...

[zigziggityzoo]

Apple will recycle ANY computer you decide to unload on them when you purchase a new computer. Even your old 486 Win 3.1 box. That way, switchers get in on the recycling action too.

Here's a snippet from the Shareholder meeting stating so.

Dell already does this

[Anonymous Coward]

Dell already offers a recycle program, for ANY computer, if you buy a Dell. They ship you, at no extra cost, a postage paid shipping container for your old computer.

Yawn... if Apple does it, it's big news, if a lowly PC manufacturer that people like to complain about does it, it's no big deal.

Re:Dell already does this

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably more "if a company that ships computers with Windows installed does it, Slashdotters won't care much."

This may sound like a troll, but I feel that way as well.

from the press release...

[Anonymous Coward]

Equipment received by the program in the US is recycled domestically and no hazardous material is shipped overseas.

all of your iPods are belong to me

[squizzz]

I for one, unlike parent, who obviously is trying to build Beowulf cluster here, gladly help to recycle your iPods. Thank you.

Free recycling in Norway

[Anonymous Coward]

In Norway, all stores, producers and importers are required by law to accept (for free) the same categories of equipment as they sell, for recycling. It is financed by taxing all companies that sell or import (new) products with a recycling tax. It's seems to be working pretty well.

May this be a good solution for other countries as well?

Re:Free recycling in Norway

[zogger]

Yes, that is the proper way to go about it. For the long term anyway, although I am sure initially they all resisted it, but perhaps not given a different social climate in Norway from the US. Here, manufacturers have been very slow to take back stuff, even something as useful as aluminum beverage cans has created controversy when they put a nickel deposit on them to make sure they got recycled insted of dumped.

I'll give you a prime example of how screwed up this is. In my area, rural, the local city government were I live doesn't have free trash pickup, nor recycling. Instead what they do is charge you so much a lb to go to the dump. The result is the ditches on the sides of the road are knee deep in trash and garbage. It's stupid and disgusting, and obvious why it happens. If all the manufacturers had to take back their used stuff and the packaging, etc,(or they subbed it out to companies dedicated to that) so that when you went to the store you could take the selected chunks of trash and dispose of them properly, it would work, after a short readjustment period. Especially if you got paid a small token to bring the stuff in, I would bet most stuff would get recycled then.

Re:Free recycling in Norway

[Majik Sheff]

Interesting to place the words 'free' and 'financed by taxes' in the same sentence. The entity being taxed is a business. What do you think the companies do to pay the recycling tax? They recover it by raising their prices. Companies and corporations DO NOT PAY TAXES, their customers do. Your 'free' recycling was paid by you and every other customer in advance. You don't have a choice but to pay the fee. Doesn't sound very free to me.

Other uses than destroying?

[MeanQuestion]

I'd honestly rather see these computers given schools than destroyed. Anything that originally shipped with OS 7 and above is still useful today. Simply install a not-so-demanding verson of Linux on in, and you can teach classes in navigating unix-like environments or a simple programming 101 courses.

Thats the kind of stuff schools should teaching anyway. Not "this is how you use a mouse and PowerPoint" type classes.

Re:Other uses than destroying?

[1u3hr]

I'd honestly rather see these computers given schools than destroyed.

Consider the nightmare of supporting a classroom of unique computers. Better to put up some ads and offer it cheap (if free, someone will just take it and try to sell it and probably end up throwing it away) and it'll probably end up with someoen who can use it. Schools would be better getting a bunch of Mac Minis.

Re:Other uses than destroying?

[Glonoinha]

I'm suprised nobody has mentioned the 'donate a computer less than two years old to a school and write off the entire purchase price on your taxes' thing they have in the US. Couple of caveats :

1. Only works for companies - individuals can't do it (which is too bad, because I would have donated my entire four box Beowulf cluster (PowerEdge 400sc machines, P4 2.8GHz HyperThreaded CPUs, GigE, and about 6G of memory and 1.3T of drive space spread across the four machines) just for the ability to write them off.)
2. You are allowed to double dip - even if you have depreciated the machines completely, you get to write off 100% of the original purchase price. If your company is paying 30% taxes and you get to write off the entire purchase price twice in two years - TCO for those two years is ~ 40% of the sticker price. If you were a small company that wasn't adverse to a little book juggling, got machines with fairly hefty rebates on them your out of pocket costs for a new machine every two years could approach $0

Here is a PC World article with enough buzzwords to assist you in better Googling.

Not Just Macs - They'll take PCs too!

[Anonymous Coward]

its not just macs they'll recycle. they'll recycle PCs as well ... as Mr. Jobs said during the shareholder's meeting, they like switchers :)

Taking over the world

[suv4x4]

- Steve Jobs wants to take over the world
- Apple all of a sudden recycles computers for free
- Steve Jobs owns Apple

This can mean only one thing: Steve Jobs has a new trapper keeper.

Re:Taking over the world

[CCFreak2K]

That means either Steve Jobs is free, or Alexander the Great has an infinite number of arms.

iMacquarium

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't do it with the flat panel Luxo Jr. iMacs, though. That would be cruelty to the fish since there barely some space between the front and the back. OTOH, they probably make great ant farms. :) The stainless steel arm must be welded, though, or at least tightened up to make up for the weight difference.

Some Context

[fm6]

In California, and many other places, it's now illegal to just throw old electronics in the trash. So Apple is actually supplying a valuable service.

Um..not just Apple..

[denoir]

In the EU, in accordance to the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive all produces of electrical and electronic devices are required by law to recycle the stuff they use - free of charge to the customer.

It doesn't matter if it's an light bulb or a missile defense system - the consumer can and is encouraged to return it to the producer. If it is not (if you dump it somewhere else), a bill for the recycling cost is sent to the producer anyway.

Re:Um..not just Apple..

[petermgreen]

a couple of points about WEEE

this has only be introduced VERY recently and it doesn't retroactivey apply to products sold before its introduction. So it'll be a few years before we find out how well it really works

if someone ships in stuff from a chineese manufacturer without a presence in the EU and then disapears before thier recycling dues come up what exactly can the state do about it? same question if the company who should be responsible goes bust?

and it seems like you missed the following paragraph of the directive when you came up with your missile defense example:
"Equipment which is connected with the protection of the essential interests of the security of Member States, arms, munitions and war material shall be excluded from this Directive. This does not, however, apply to products which are not intended for specifically military purposes."

Re:Um..not just Apple..

[denoir]

Well, the missile defense part was a joke, but you are absolutely right that the law has only recently come into effect.

And it's sort of the point why I brought it up. Since they're now forced by law to recycle in the EU, they might as well do it in America too. They will have to invest in the infrastructure either way, so extending the recycling to the US won't cost them that much.

what the article actually says

[DietFluffy]

am i missing something?

not free (you need to buy a mac). not macs (any computer as long as you buy a mac)

Re:what the article actually says

[DietFluffy]

I'm aware that the CNN headline says that Apple will recycle "old Macs," but I think the author was just confused. In the past Apple has recycled computers regardless of manufacturer: http://www.apple.com/environment/recycling/nationa lservices/us.html

Privacy concerns?

[Parallax Blue]

Hey, I know Apple is definitely NOT Microsoft, but it's still a big corporation. What are they doing about privacy concerns related to old data stored on the computer hard drives? I'd expect it to be a problem because the majority of the people who would use this service may not know how to properly get rid of any data on their hard drives, and taking apart the computer to get at the hard drive may be too much to expect.

Re:Privacy concerns?

[King_TJ]

Personally, I don't feel a corporation has to do *anything* about this. It's up to the person possessing the data to determine whether his/her information is too "private" to release to others. IMHO, it's just a cop-out to say that despite knowing enough about using a computer to store years worth of your sensitive information in one, you have no idea how to get rid of it afterwards.

There are numerous freeware, shareware and even commercial utilities out there that do secure disk wipes. And even if you're incapable of buying or downloading one of these yourself, asking around should find you somebody among your friends or family who could help with it.

But even having said all of that - sure, some people will be too lazy to make an effort. (Easier to just shrug your shoulders and say "I'm not a computer geek! How the heck should I know how to erase my stuff securely?!") Doesn't mean it becomes Apple's (or even Microsoft's) responsibility to ensure their old data is destroyed for them. Realistically, it should be since recycling a computer probably means tearing it down, piece by piece. The hard drive is going to get disassembled too. But if some weird case pops up where a recycler is scavenging old drives for data and reselling people's credit card info on the net - then so be it. They're still subject to prosecution under the law ... and the victims were the ones most deserving of any inconvenience they got anyway.

Re:Privacy concerns?

[v1]

It's difficult to save people from their own ignorance, and it's not practical to make the rest of the world responsible for protecting the ignorant from themselves. When I sell you a car, I don't teach you how to drive, and it's surely not someone else's fault if you run into a tree. If you don't want to run into a tree, either don't buy a car or go get some driving lessons, but leave me alone.

Blanket rebuttle to passing the buck...

[multimediavt]

There are a lot of theorists posting, "Why not donate the old machines to [insert education or third-world country here]?"

Well, the answer to that is very simple: Because you are passing the ecological disaster on and not dealing with it. Off the cuff, it sounds like a good idea, however, a developing nation is not going to have the resources to deal with recycling the hand-me-down computers that we passed off to them so we didn't have to properly recycle them.

Let's just properly recycle the old crap and sell them new machines with fewer parts and less of a recycling burden. No one says we have to use the latest and greatest things performance-wise in what is made for them, but dumping our junk on a less fortunate country is just wrong people!

Easiest for the PowerBook 5300

[sulli]

Just plug it in and wait for it to explode!

Indeed...

[Svartalf]

The Computer Take-Back Campaign was canvassing this neighborhood for signatures and all just about a week or so ago.

They've been really aggressive about getting letters, etc. to Jobs and BOD members about doing take-backs on the computers (They already do them on iPods for free...) and to handle the returns in a responsible manner.

Links from the horse's mouth

[Jon Abbott]

Neither Slashdot nor CNN posted Apple's official computer recycling webpage, so here it is. For the U.S. (excluding the Cupertino area) they are partnered with a company called Metech to do the recycling. In Cupertino, Apple has had their own recycling facility for quite some time now that has freely accepted used Macs, PCs and some home electronics.

Apple are hilarious

[Xyde]

Hot on the heels of the bitchin' MacBook Pro is this little gem:

In response, Jobs noted that the Sierra Club recently voted Apple one of its top 10 environmentally friendly companies. "So there is some kind of disconnect with your numbers," he said. Jobs also noted that Apple's new recycling program takes any computer, not just Macs, "because we like switchers, too."

"I think there are a lot of PCs that should be recycled" Schiller added.

teehee

not even close to true

[Anonymous Coward]

Not even in the ballpark. It costs way more in energy/materials to manufacture a new computer than the energy used to run the thing for years and years. And every new computer made is responsible for *tons* of pollutants,solids, gasses and liquids, and a lot of energy expended. You have to start at the mines, then look at shipping/processing/manufacture of components/more shipping/ assembly/more shipping, etc until you can even start to come up with a cost. They just aren't poof created out of the thin air leaving behind pristine sparkling waters and clean air, nor are they made using some zero-sum vacuum free energy, no, no,. no they are NOT. That "new whizzbang CPU computer uses less watts!!" might be true, but in the grand scheme of things it is marketing buzz words to induce you to chunk the old machine and get a new one, it has nothing to do with environmental altruism..nothing. Don't fall for the hype, look at the TRUE total cost of ownership to the planet if you want to play the energy and pollution game, don't stop looking at just some arbitrary watts per hertz business. That's like saying if you have a crate of nails that is marginally cheaper than the last crate of nails you bought that you now own a house and know what it will cost to liove there, you've left out quite a few important steps and materials there, most of them in fact.

Uhh... It actually costs 8 dollars.

[mattyohe]

There is an 8 dollar fee when you purchase Macs now... It's a Recycling Fee. So yeah... Not free. http://homepage.mac.com/xidius/17mbp.jpg

Two words

[Anonymous Coward]

Crack Babies. (ok, oversimplification: should also include FAS & LD kids)

DC has an astronomical rate of $$/student as a whole. The problem is that the cash is largely being spent on "Special Needs" kids, with everyone else left to suck. But if you want, Linda Crapp (former chairperson of the schoolboard & current city council chair) is running for mayor. I beleive her slogan is "I couldn't fix it on the school-board, I couldn't fix it on city council, I can't fix it as chair of the city council, but I'll fix it as mayor."

I agree

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to refurb older computers, clean them up, give them away to kids (rural poor kids in my community). They were all decent, worked well enough for school reports, surfing the web, email, etc. They all had legit licensed copies of the OS too, stuff I paid for, 95 and 98 primarily, then I would install like zone alarm and similar on them, get them all set up (no linux I found-and I tried a BUNCH- would run on pitiful amounts of RAM in GUI, so I used older windows) Not a one of them ever really bothered to learn computing, or programming or anything intelligent, ALL of them used the machines primarily for videogames. Closest they came to making them practical was to slap stickers on the outside of them...it's was nuts and a big waste of my time and money.

I don't do that anymore, not worth it, I'm relatively poor, not going to pay to subsidise that so called industry. It's stupidity, this generation's waste of time and effort. Might as well watch pro wrestling or NASCAR or something for all the good it does.

As to the schools, hell ya, if I had school age kids now they WOULD be home schooled, I have seen up close the results of the social engineering and alleged educational system as it is run today. It has gone downhill BAD since they created the federal department of education. There are a few fed agencies that should just be totally shut down as complete failed experiments, that one is near the top of the list, IMO.

Re:I agree

[Illbay]

Note the yours and the other "Anonymous Coward's" posts were modded up, and mine was modded down.

Slashdot has serious moderation quality issues.

And yes, I do Meta-Moderate, about three times a week.

Uhh, the free program starts in JUNE.

[Warlock7]

But why bother to RTFA?

The old program costs you eight bucks, while the new one is free. The old program was still very reasonable.

Starting in June, Apple will offer a free computer take-back program for U.S. customers who buy a new Mac through the Apple Store or an Apple retail store. Check back soon for more details.

why not give them away

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not give the macs to anyone willing to take them as is,pay for shipping and maybie agree to pay a premium if they need a little help via tech support?

It's just you.

[dreamer-of-rules]

There's a mandatory recycling fee for monitors in California. Screens between 15" and 35" have an $8 fee (CRT and LCD). This only started last year, so it's misleading to say that just because you were charged a state-imposed tax on a newly purchased system, that it wasn't "free" to recycle your POS Pentium-III system. Heck, everyone has to charge the tax, but you don't see Fry's begging to take back your old systems*.

From the .gov site: http://www.erecycle.org/fee.htm
Or clearer details: http://www.mpccorp.com/about/california_fee.html

* Actually, they might. I didn't check.

Give Em to Third world contries

[tecker]

If they wanted to they could take and put the latest OS X (if that or a Linux dist) on them if they were in good condition and sell them for pennies (Cost of shipping?) to the rural china. If Microsoft is going to invest in china, and there are companies in china who plan on making a product that will cost 6 months of a person wages, why not simply put the whole thing there. Why?

1. Increase product awareness.
2. Screw Your Competition
3. "Save the environment"

hey you might even provide an opertunity for learning and education in an area that is highly disconnected from the resorces that we enjoy.

Well have to see.

sent overseas?

[weg]

I wonder if this means they will actually recycle them in Cupertino, or sent overseas to be dumped

Do a little research before you submit a story next time.. especially if the story is several days old. From Apples homepage:

Hazardous materials

No hazardous waste from Apple's U.S. recycling program is shipped outside North America. All recovered materials are processed domestically, with the exception of some commodity materials that can be recycled for future use. Apple's recycling policies prohibit the use of recovered plastics as fuel in smelting.

What about the monitors?

[Anonymous Coward]

Recycling the computers themselves is easy. It is the monitors which cost money to recycle. The monitor is also the bit with the most noxious chemicals in it & thus is in the greatest need to be properly disposed of.

I can recycle computers for nothing all day long. But deconstructing monitors takes special equipment & its not cheap.

Re:What about the monitors?

[v1]

Does this also apply to LCDs? All macs (except eMacs, shortly to be discontinued) now come with flatscreens.

Not all electronics recyclers do that

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to work for these guys http://www.surplusexchange.org/ here in Kansas City, They are VERY particular about how their equipment gets recycled and you can rest assured NONE of it winds up being disposed in the manner you described.

In fact when i worked there we got 3 or 4 calls per month from people wanting to pay US for our dead monitors (usually to be shipped to the orient & dismantled as you say) and we always turned them down & sent them instead to the site where we PAY to have it done correctly...

This is why they charge $12 per for dead monitors.

Anyway, my point is, there are eco-friendly electronics recyclers out there, they arent all crooked, just do your homework & check them out. and PLEASE dont put your old computer in the landfill!

Re:Not all electronics recyclers do that

[jridley]

Please don't think I was actually suggesting landfilling electronics. Personally I dismantle computers myself, dump the cases and such into the ferrous metal bin at the recycling place, and put the boards in a box in my basement until I find a place that I think will handle them properly.

Apple recycled Lisas too

[Anonymous Coward]

In 1989, Apple "recycled" a whole load of Lisas into a landfill for a tax writeoff. Very environmentally friendly...

Huh?

[Cantus]

I'm NOT giving up my old Mac for free.

Apple should pay me good cash, or a decent discount on a new Mac (say over 30%) if they want to keep my old Mac.

"For free" in this case isn't necessarily a good thing.

Re:Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

If it still works and you want to keep it, simply DON'T TURN IT IN FOR RECYCLING!

Wow! That was simple.

Recycling is easy

[nurb432]

You set the old computer out at the curb. By the morning its gone. its been 'recycled'.

Not a clone, but very close to a "G5 in Black"

[sethstorm]

Now one might explain why IBM suddenly is selling these systems with very similar specs to these. Yes, the 185 is a bit neutered (memory, undocumented AIX only 3d graphics, PCI-X versus PCI-E), but they'd make for a nice system to use recycled 970's.

Re:Not a clone, but very close to a "G5 in Black"

[Anonymous Coward]

Those IBM's are nice, but does IBM actually sale them? The last time I tried to get a price out of IBM for a G5 based server, I gave-up in disgust after six weeks. Six weeks and I still don't know how much they cost! We have an old AIX machine we need to replace, but just buying something now from IBM is near impossible. When I bought my first system from IBM when I worked at a large textile company, they were much easier to deal with. You could actually get them to quote prices. How does a company expect to survive if they treat prices like trade secrets and refuse to sale products?

You're forgetting use value

[barutanseijin]

In general, no one cares if something with very little use value is numerically scarce. Very few people will want it, and the price will reflect that. Unless these things are fetish objects (aka "collectibles"), they are junk.

Apple complies with Electronic Waste Recycling Act

[Animats]

Actually, this is more like "Apple Complies with Electronic Waste Recycling Act of 2003". This has just become a big deal because, as of two weeks ago, you can't dispose of computers in the trash in California.

The big push behind this is because of the phaseout of CRTs. Until recently, the leaded glass in CRTs could be recycled into new CRTs, and there was some value in used monitors. Now nobody wants the things, and CRTs are being discarded at a huge rate. So keeping all that lead out of landfills is a real problem.

Don't you have to buy a Mac first?

[Swift2001]

Then they'll recycle the old one for you. In fact, they'll gladly take the PC you converted from.

Just a note

[catwh0re]

Apple are actually taking -any- PC for manufacturing "because we like switchers, too".

At this point Schiller added that "I think there are a lot of PCs that should be recycled"

Need to watch more TV...

[WgT2]

I actually caught the end of an educational piece about how in every ton of "computer parts", read: circuit board, there is 3oz of gold. Thus making it cheaper to mine gold out of "computer parts" than from the earth.

So, dumping (those parts) into a land fill would just be a waist... of 3oz of gold. :)

Re:Need to watch more TV...

[v1]

I've seen that statistic posted several times, but no one mentions anything about cost of recovery. Ore is (dirt) cheap and is non-toxic. The left-overs are somewhat toxic, due to the chemicals they add to extract the gold properly. With computers, the gold is in bigger chunks and is more highly concentrated, but it's not as easy to get out and produces a laundry list of nasty liquids, solids, and especially toxic vapors during the gold recovery process. Those products must be disposed of or filterd and disposed of, at cost. I wonder, which actually ends up with the greater net proffit? A ton of gold ore or a ton of computers?

Re:Need to watch more TV...

[WgT2]

According to the program, it's the ton of computers.

They didn't go over the waist products of mining computer parts for their gold, but no doubt it's there. I have to assume their calculations include the details of dealing with those waists as well.

Besides, I've crossed streams coming from a gold mine in the south of Peru, about 80 miles from Puerto Maldonado, that was undrinkable due to the cyanide or mercury, I forgot which was told me, used in that mine's extraction processes.

Re:Need to watch more TV...

[v1]

cyanide or mercury

both, iirc, are the major two by-products of gold refining.

Apple, you're about 4 years too late

[r_jensen11]

Too bad you weren't doing this about 4 years ago, when my family decided to finally get rid of the 3 Apple IIe's that were laying around my house.

True of desktops if not too old...

[skids]

Beyond a certain point, older computers use more power, simply because they don't have power savings modes and the electronics are somewhat less efficient (e.g. no "cpu-idle" powersaving instruction.) When considered on a power/performance basis you can always get more efficient with newer technology.

Laptops, however, are an area where power is of tantamount importance and as such, newer laptop parts will often be more efficient than older ones. The CPUs themselves are sometimes the exception to that -- everything else has been getting more efficient.

Right now I have an old salvaged decade-old DEC server-class tower downstairs running my webserver and some other stuff. It has no power savings modes, and draws a steady 150W (measured with a kill-a-watt) even if I spin down the drives (which I can't in production because Linux hasn't got that smoothed over for SCSI yet.) Electricity costs me $0.14/kWh. In a year it costs me $184 to power this server. For that amount of money I can replace it with a 5-year-old used laptop of roughly equivalent performance, which, even with the backlight on and the drive spinning uses one tenth of that amount of power (also measured.) Not to mention it would then not need a UPS as it has one built in.

All it takes the ability to not obsess over hyper-performance, and properly size a system for your always-active needs. Obsess all you want over the performance of a gaming machine that is only in active mode for a few hours while your using it, but move the rest of the services to a power-efficient system and you can save a good amount of pizza-money.

Re:who will help

[Anonymous Coward]

I am looking for free recyled computers. Please advise who can support shippment to Kenya.