Slashdot Mirror


Apple Forces Recyclers To Shred All iPhones and MacBooks (vice.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Apple released its Environmental Responsibility Report Wednesday, an annual grandstanding effort that the company uses to position itself as a progressive, environmentally friendly company. Behind the scenes, though, the company undermines attempts to prolong the lifespan of its products. Apple's new moonshot plan is to make iPhones and computers entirely out of recycled materials by putting pressure on the recycling industry to innovate. But documents obtained by Motherboard using Freedom of Information requests show that Apple's current practices prevent recyclers from doing the most environmentally friendly thing they could do: Salvage phones and computers from the scrap heap. Apple rejects current industry best practices by forcing the recyclers it works with to shred iPhones and MacBooks so they cannot be repaired or reused -- instead, they are turned into tiny shards of metal and glass. "Materials are manually and mechanically disassembled and shredded into commodity-sized fractions of metals, plastics, and glass," John Yeider, Apple's recycling program manager, wrote under a heading called "Takeback Program Report" in a 2013 report to Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. "All hard drives are shredded in confetti-sized pieces. The pieces are then sorted into commodities grade materials. After sorting, the materials are sold and used for production stock in new products. No reuse. No parts harvesting. No resale."

224 comments

  1. User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is, has been, and continues to be a problem. It's easy to blame Apple but it's an industry wide issue. It's so much more profitable to sell a new product than to repair and sell a used one. Also the industry's business model is to dump the old and get the new latest product. This model will not last long if the market is full of old products. So it's not surprising that they rather destroy than repair and sell.
    The solution lies on the user. At some point we have to take blame on how the industry functions. Apple would not be the mammoth it is if we did not buy and support their business model.
    What Apple is doing is to make a show of their recycling effort so that most people don't feel bad about getting a new Apple product but they can still continue to sell and make the most profits. Make no mistake profits will win over recycling.
    To fix this, we could pressure the company to reform their ways by buying the competition's products that follow more sustainable practices. Not likely since they are so good at selling and there probably isn't a direct replacement. Or we can pressure our government representatives to do something about it. A good candidate solution since we have slowly increased what companies must do to protect the environment. We are not at the best point but we are getting there. We need to add pressure to our reps to continue. What they've done is not enough.
    The best thing we can do is to resist the pressure to upgrade our gadgets. No we don't need to upgrade every year and no we don't need the new shiny gadget that will be put in the dump in a few months. The fix starts with us.

    1. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Not a direct replacement for an Apple product?
      You're serious?
      Only an Apple fanatic could think something like that, given that there are indeed direct replacements for every Apple product.

    2. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well if every tech company that sells hardware would do this then sure i could see a reduction in waste but they don't. i know apple is easy to blame but it wasn't too long ago when they were at the bottom of the totem pole and IBM, Dell, HP, Nokia all made a ton more hardware and yet were people bitching then?

    3. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      i know apple is easy to blame but it wasn't too long ago when they were at the bottom of the totem pole and IBM, Dell, HP, Nokia all made a ton more hardware and yet were people bitching then?

      You bet they were. Extending the usable life-cycle of electronics has been an issue since at least the early 1990s.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Name one other product that can run iOS and be a phone at the same time.

    5. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by bigfinger76 · · Score: 2

      If I recall correctly, the major manufacturers in the 90s (Dell, Gateway, etc) voluntarily recycled their stuff due to outcry over the newly coined 'e-waste'.

    6. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Why blame Apple when you can blame Apple customers who feel they need a new model every year?

    7. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree it's an industry wide problem, this is exacerbated by them actually misleading that they're enivornmentally friendly. It happened with BPA (I think that was the chemical) when the original i phone came out (everyone else had already phased it out like 5+ years prior)... When the next version came out, they were "OMG WE'RE SO GREEN". Might as well wipe shit all over your food, then wash it and say it's clean food.

    8. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 2

      Just to put your solution into real world perspective, where real people live.

      Recently a certain auto maker was the front page occupant of many newspapers for a huge diesel scandal (I bet you can't guess who!)
      You know something? I haven't seen so many goddamned Golfs and Jettas on the road since

      --
      I tend to rant.
    9. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another fix is to stop buying Apple products. Big corps only move when revenue drops sharply.

    10. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by sudon't · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not a direct replacement for an Apple product?
      You're serious?
      Only an Apple fanatic could think something like that, given that there are indeed direct replacements for every Apple product.

      Name another product that can run OS X. The only other choices are Windows, which, Windows, or Linux, which isn't nearly as user-friendly. I have friends who use both of those systems - no thank you! Only OS X gives you a *nix system that is not only very stable and configurable, but incredibly easy to use. Android is a decent imitation of iOS, looks a lot like it, but the iPhone still kills it. I mean, why do you think Apple has fanatical users?

      Hate on Apple all you want. I hate them, too. Always have. But no one can touch their products, even as they try to imitate them. That's just a fact. Whether they'll be able to keep this up with Jobs gone remains to be seen, but I am not about to start using Windows.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    11. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No we don't need to upgrade every year

      With crap like forced updates and batteries that can't be replaced, the companies are certainly trying to rectify that little weakness in their plans.

    12. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot an OS. OpenBSD is not only better and more secure than both windows and osx, it is simpler to use.
      I do agree that android sucks, but ios is not any better. There is no longer a useful phone OS on the market.

    13. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most users of Apple products that I know personally do not buy each new model. And the one that I know does, always sells his old one used. In fact, I can't think of anyone who would just give a working device to Apple when buying a new one. The resale value of Apple hardware almost always makes the bother of finding a buyer worth it.

    14. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Type44Q · · Score: 0

      It's easy to blame Apple...

      Yes because they're complete cocksuckers (metaphorically-speaking, Tim) about repairability... and to hear that they're forcing third parties to deliberately destroying viable replacement parts... they seem to be going from blatantly sociopathic (under Jobs - but what's there to say; they're a publically-traded corporation) - to borderline psychopathic. I say fuck 'em with a sharp stick. Okay, only not if they like it. ;)

    15. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Spacelem · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That is debatable. Having used Linux for around 13 years, and OS X for about 4, I personally find Linux easier to use. The number of times I've struggled to make something work in OS X, even something as simple as turn off mouse scroll wheel acceleration and make the mouse movement less jumpy.

      OS X is probably easy to use if you're happy with the default configuration and all your applications can be installed via drag and drop, but the moment you start trying to do something else, or want a different music player to iTunes, then that user friendliness just seems to dwindle away. I still don't know how to make my mouse feel right, or stop many applications from looking horrible on a retina display. I find aptitude much easier than the mix of Mac Ports and manual installation / updating.

      Frankly, if I didn't need access to Microsoft products for collaboration purposes and hadn't been given a MBP by my work, then I'd happily use Linux full time (btw no, I'm not an application developer or full time programmer, just a university researcher).

    16. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Might as well wipe shit all over your food, then wash it and say it's clean food.

      The president likes your idea and wants to appoint you to head the USDA and FDA. The savings from less regulation will be HUGE.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    17. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

      The best thing we can do is to resist the pressure to upgrade our gadgets. No we don't need to upgrade every year and no we don't need the new shiny gadget that will be put in the dump in a few months. The fix starts with us.

      I hate to say it, but I think we've already lost this battle.

      I run a Galaxy Note 3, and have done so since about its release date back in Sept 2013. For me, it's flawless - 4 monster CPUs, a great OLED screen, thermometer, barometer, hygrometer, great camera (with 4k video), LTE/MiMo, running CM13 (Android 6.0.1). I have no reason or desire to upgrade. None. I'll still be using this phone for 3 or 4 more years unless I break or lose it.

      Here's the trick: I'm on my third replacement battery.

      This behavior costs the incumbent manufacturers money, and they have put a stop to it by gluing batteries into devices. They all do it now. It's disgusting. And we allow it. And don't be surprised if they start chipping and authenticating the batteries in the future.

      This is the battleground, and very few people seem to understand it. Gluing batteries into phones encourages users to replace them at least every two years (as they typically start just long enough to last a day, and after two years, can't do that anymore). Replacement is mandatory, for many users, after 3. Forget about 5, 6, or 10 years.

      The practice should be illegal as it is a huge waste of resources, recycling or not.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    18. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      I mean, why do you think Apple has fanatical users?

      Since I have to use Apple because of software that only they have, I gotta say that the integration of the iPhone and MacOS is pretty sweet. It doesn't take a fanboi to appreciate seamless integration.

      I also use Android, Linux and Windows. No solutions on those that are as seamless.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    19. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by garcia · · Score: 1

      I still don't know how to make my mouse feel right, or stop many applications from looking horrible on a retina display.

      I want to know what you use on Linux which makes dealing with resolutions and mice easier than a couple of clicks in OS X. If we accept your mouse thing as a realty, I could even follow along with you; however, saying you have applications which don't look ok on a Retina display is something which I simply cannot fathom.

      Please explain.

    20. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      i know apple is easy to blame but it wasn't too long ago when they were at the bottom of the totem pole and IBM, Dell, HP, Nokia all made a ton more hardware and yet were people bitching then?

      You bet they were. Extending the usable life-cycle of electronics has been an issue since at least the early 1990s.

      Of course. But the reason they are bitching now is because Apple.

      I have my own lifecycle extension program. Installing Linux on older machines that are too slow for modern Windows, or when MacOS has bypassed them.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Why blame Apple when you can blame Apple customers who feel they need a new model every year?

      Your meme is pretty lame. I still see a lot of iPhone 5's in use, and even some 4's. On the other hand, I know several Android phone users who get new phones whenever they read what the hot new model is.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    22. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Just to put your solution into real world perspective, where real people live.

      Recently a certain auto maker was the front page occupant of many newspapers for a huge diesel scandal (I bet you can't guess who!) You know something? I haven't seen so many goddamned Golfs and Jettas on the road since

      So the coalroller crowd has checked in.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    23. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hackintosh

    24. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, I know several iPhone users who wait in line for hours on end in front of an Apple store for a new iPhone. I also see a lot of old Android phones, old enough to the point they don't get security updates old. So, what's your point?

    25. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not just "Apple".

      It is the fact that Apple tries to present themselves as environmentally friendly and behind the scenes does things in direct contrast to their image.

    26. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is because you are psychologically keyed to notice them now.

    27. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      No we don't need to upgrade every year

      With crap like forced updates and batteries that can't be replaced, the companies are certainly trying to rectify that little weakness in their plans.

      Liar.

      Apple does not force updates. I ran iOS 7 on my iPad for forever, and I still run OS X 10.9 on my MacBook Pro.

      As for batteries: They are replaceable. Just not as easily as you would like.

    28. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      The best thing we can do is to resist the pressure to upgrade our gadgets. No we don't need to upgrade every year and no we don't need the new shiny gadget that will be put in the dump in a few months. The fix starts with us.

      I hate to say it, but I think we've already lost this battle.

      I run a Galaxy Note 3, and have done so since about its release date back in Sept 2013. For me, it's flawless - 4 monster CPUs, a great OLED screen, thermometer, barometer, hygrometer, great camera (with 4k video), LTE/MiMo, running CM13 (Android 6.0.1). I have no reason or desire to upgrade. None. I'll still be using this phone for 3 or 4 more years unless I break or lose it.

      Here's the trick: I'm on my third replacement battery.

      This behavior costs the incumbent manufacturers money, and they have put a stop to it by gluing batteries into devices. They all do it now. It's disgusting. And we allow it. And don't be surprised if they start chipping and authenticating the batteries in the future.

      This is the battleground, and very few people seem to understand it. Gluing batteries into phones encourages users to replace them at least every two years (as they typically start just long enough to last a day, and after two years, can't do that anymore). Replacement is mandatory, for many users, after 3. Forget about 5, 6, or 10 years.

      The practice should be illegal as it is a huge waste of resources, recycling or not.

      If Samsung would stop overcharging their batteries, they'd last longer. That's a fact.

      My iPad 2 at 5 years old and HEAVY use daily, still has nearly 100% of the battery life it did brand new, nor has the charge time changed in any noticeable way.

      My iPhone 4s (although I don't use it anymore), went into the drawer with no appreciable battery life or charge time difference from new.

      My current iPhone 6 Plus, going on 3 years now (I think), still lasts about 4 days of general use, and again, I haven't noticed any degradation of battery life or change in charge-time.

      Samsung just beats the hell out of their batteries, and guess what? They don't last under those conditions.

    29. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love my S8.

      Dude, Apple sucks ass. iPhones are so Passe.

    30. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, I know several iPhone users who wait in line for hours on end in front of an Apple store for a new iPhone. I also see a lot of old Android phones, old enough to the point they don't get security updates old. So, what's your point?

      My point is that the original assertion that Apple Customers who want a new phone every year are to blame for phone recycling is simply incorrect.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    31. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      It is not just "Apple".

      It is the fact that Apple tries to present themselves as environmentally friendly and behind the scenes does things in direct contrast to their image.

      Is there something environmentally unfriendly about recycling the phones?

      Here's the interesting thing sparky. Android users like to brag about how Android is the master of the universe, the best phone ever made and use by so many more people thn Apple.

      What is their recycling policy. Apple, who demands recycling- is only a drop in the bucket. Android manufacturers need to show how tht are more environmentally responsible.

      Of course, the real answer that you have tried to turn ecycling into not recycling is that you hate Apple. Hatred gets people to go into newspeak mode

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    32. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think everyone is different. There are people who actually like windows or Linux. There are others who like Macs.

      Personally, I bought an iMac in 2000 in anticipation of OS X coming out. I loved it through 10.6. Ever since, it's been going downhill. The NeXT guys retired and the people they trained have started to retire or leave apple. The new guys want to try something new and they don't get what worked.

      I've used many operating systems as it's a passion of mine. I even started a FreeBSD fork to work on desktops.

      Personally, I don't like Linux now because of the brute force nature of that world. Systemd is just one example. I don't like change for the sake of change. If there are good reasons and a good implementation, great. When I was a Linux user regularly, they had massive file system reliability issues but that was in the late 90s. Since then, they've got ext3 & 4 and working jfs ports. If you're willing to learn over again how to use your computer every few years, it's an OK OS now.

      For apple, they have some software problems, but massive hardware problems. They don't get hardware. They're designing for the guy that only uses facebook, listens to two songs and barely uses email. They forgot that some people have big music collections, they have lots of email and they might do something technical or resource intensive like make 4k videos, write software, do research, etc. The decline of the Mac pro, high end iMacs and even the Macbook Pro becoming the consumer laptop rather than a pro device are all examples. Apple has always had an ego, but they used to do things that made sense. For example, the iPhone headphone jack fiasco. If they wanted to take away the jack, then it should have been for bluetooth or USB type C. At the very least, all desktops should have a lightning port so you can use your headphones on macs and phones. I'm not buying two expensive sets of headphones.

    33. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There was a report from somewhere last year that when the new iphone models are announced that the number of accidentally broken or lost phones increased. It was surmised that perhaps this occured subconsciously so that there would be an excuse to get a new one. Possibly this applies to Android?
      http://brobible.com/life/artic...

    34. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To fix this, we could pressure the company to reform their ways by buying the competition's products that follow more sustainable practices. ...

      Apple already does this. The iPhones are rebranded Samsung phones.

    35. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Kevoco · · Score: 1

      Market forces: I can "trade-in" my iPhone for a pittance (because it will be shredded) or I can sell it, working or not, for more (because it's worth more as a phone and not as a pile of shreddings)

    36. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Captain+Centropyge · · Score: 1

      Many people prefer non-Apple products because Apple restricts them too much. Want to upgrade hardware in your Apple computer? Gotta buy overpriced Apple hardware... Want to install custom apps on your iPhone? Nope... can't do it.

      I'll admit, Apple integrates their devices well. But, that's also the problem. They HAVE to be Apple products to all work together. While other products don't always integrate as well as Apple products do, you can find a LOT of other choices (Android, Windows, Linux, etc.) that can still be integrated in some fashion. The key word there is "choices".

      Once you buy into Apple, you're stuck there. And that's EXACTLY why I don't own any Apple products.

      --
      Bite my shiny metal ass!
    37. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      There was a report from somewhere last year that when the new iphone models are announced that the number of accidentally broken or lost phones increased. It was surmised that perhaps this occured subconsciously so that there would be an excuse to get a new one. Possibly this applies to Android? http://brobible.com/life/artic...

      Very possibly could be related. People are strange.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    38. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Granted, but the problem with iDevices is that they all come form a walled garden where only those developers and support engineers who have drank the koolaid and have been fully initiated into the cult... only they have been given the necessary APIs and documentation to actually understand what's really going on under the hood, and, ergo, how to fix an iDevice. God forbid you should ever actually encounter a problem, because if you do, and it's not just a setting that got changed somewhere, a lot of times you are shit out of luck on a fix.

      Do you know just how many stupid fucking bugs Apple devices have that no Apple fanboy wants to admit to? But NOOOooo... the fact that you can't get your e-mail from my Exchange server MUST be the server's fault, even AFTER I have purged your device partnership and proven through the creation of test accounts and having someone in IT test with a similar iDevice we can't replicate your issue. And then your "Genius Bar" fuckwits *still* try to convince you that there's no way there could EVER be a problem with an Apple device. I've seen this type of crap with VPNs, ActiveSync, the general Mail app, hell I've even seen Safari go to shit before. But it's NEVER Apple's fault. Once they've drunk deep of the koolaid, their minds are made up that the problem is always on YOUR end and that YOU should simply be able to fix it. Supporting Apple products is something I abhor, if for no other reason than the fact that there only 1 in 1,000 Apple users actually knows anything about computers or networking or general troubleshooting, so YOU always get blamed for THEIR problems. Fucking cunts.

      Though I guess if I was going to be enough of a snobby twatbag to spend $700 on a phone every year, I'd probably feel entitled to my snobbery and simply expect everything to "just work" without any actual effort on my part as well...

    39. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to know what you use on Linux which makes dealing with resolutions and mice easier than a couple of clicks in OS X.

      KDE, surely?

    40. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there something environmentally unfriendly about recycling the phones?

      • Tossing phone in landfill: bad
      • Grinding phone to bits and recycling the metal, plastic, and glass: better
      • Refurbishing phone so it gets a couple more years of use before recycling: best
    41. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by citylivin · · Score: 0

      Please. apple cant even get their mouse to scroll properly. Always has this crazy lag that's absolutely unusable for me. Even if you adjust the sensitivity it is there and it sends chills up my spine using the mouse in osx.

      Meanwhile windows 7 is rock solid, compatible with way more software, and does everything perfectly. And oh, no app store and forced account creation!

      The things microsoft has done with windows 10 pale in comparison to the invasiveness that is OSX on a daily. All of which is fully accepted by the fanbois as "ease of use" features. Because really, apple users don't know any other way than having mommy apple babysit them and coddle them and tell them that they are special.

      people buy apple products because 1) they want to look cool (fashion) and 2) because they are already locked in to an ecosystem that is very hard to get out of once you have invested in it. They don't buy apple products for their longevity, ease of repair, or quality. They certainly don't buy apple because they care that its unix.

      And FYI, i have a friend or two with a hackintosh. So considering that its all intel chips below, it is not too hard to invalidate your first claim. Plenty of PC's can run OSX if you set them up right.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    42. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      The fuck is a coalroller? Why the hell treat me as such for stating an observation of mine?
      Why am I even bothering!?

      OH THE HORROR

      --
      I tend to rant.
    43. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Is there something environmentally unfriendly about recycling the phones?

      • Tossing phone in landfill: bad
      • Grinding phone to bits and recycling the metal, plastic, and glass: better
      • Refurbishing phone so it gets a couple more years of use before recycling: best

      That would be the ideal situation. It will be years if and until we see that happen, I fear.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    44. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The fuck is a coalroller? Why the hell treat me as such for stating an observation of mine?

      Coalrolling is an activity performed by some deisel vehicle owners, who alter their (usually trucks) to put out large amounts of smoke when they see people in cars like the Prius, which gets good gas mileage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Apparently this puts the roller in a superior intellectual place.

      I have no idea if you are a coal roller or not - I certainly hope not. But the concept of people going out of there way to use vehicles that put out more pollutants than is legal, just reminded me of the silly practice. Regardless, it assumes that the person in the Prius is some sort of timid thing who will just shy away. The most crazy conservative itchy trigger finger guy I know drove a Prius. He liked the technology. If someone rolled coal on him, they would probably find he took a second amendment solution on them. Sad, yet perhaps fortunately, the tortured soul has passed on.

      Why am I even bothering!?

      OH THE HORROR

      Chillaxe brother, it was mere jest.

      I do joke, or at least I will until someone takes a second amendment solution on me.

      That was also a joke,

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    45. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Or be a durable fully functional OSX laptop that weighs less than 10 pounds.

    46. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      I was drunk. I send you many apologies.

      To keep this conversation rolling (hah. hah.), I don't think its people going out of their way to buy cars with a higher pollution output. My good friend recently bought herself a new VW, because well, she's used to them and the service was far above-average.

      Usually when people think about the impact their purchase has on the environment (and they only do because the media tells them to), the vast majority will resolve that with a "well, what real difference am I going to make anyways?" and then gravitate towards the more personal reasons to buy X from Y company, like good service for example.

      Really, I can't blame that method of thinking. If something is so truly damning to the environment, it should be handled at a much higher level than an individual's though process while making a purchase.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    47. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting idea.

      However from my personal perspective, I love (that's a serious understatement) driving around and just enjoying the world around me.
      Around here, it's always been high volumes of the following vehicles :
      - Civics
      - F150s
      - Sierras/Silverados
      - RAMs (Not the kind you put in your PC)

      VWs in general were fairly common, but not to the tune that they are today. I've seen more GTIs in the past couple years than my entire years in high school, and those are hard not to notice, I think they look pretty slick, actually!

      --
      I tend to rant.
    48. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Removing the headphone jack is a great idea as now they have a waterproof iPhone...works for me.

    49. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux, which isn't nearly as user-friendly. I have friends who use both of those systems - no thank you! Only OS X gives you a *nix system that is not only very stable and configurable, but incredibly easy to use.

      As a person that has used "nix systems" for over 20 years I have to call bullshit on this. Clearly you have worked with other UNIX based systems. Apple has done all they can to take the nix out of the system and wall it up. Easy to use? Actually I find Linux far easier to use and stability is not a problem. The desktop I am typing on has been running for over 3 years not WITHOUT ONE PROBLEM. 3 years ago it took less than one hour to load the OS it found every bit of hardware connected to it configured that hardware and has been running since. Also I find KDE a lot easier to use than OSX.

      I mean, why do you think Apple has fanatical users

      They are attracted to shiny. Fish are attracted to shiny things too and have very small brains.

    50. Re:User's need to take responsibility too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, these people don't think pollution will cause climate channge and therefore all other effects like inhaling causing medical issues are also non-existant

    51. Re: User's need to take responsibility too. by Spacelem · · Score: 1

      You can get incredibly fine control over your mouse on Linux with xinput. Yes, you have to use the command line, and it takes a little experimentation, but it's all there for you to customise. To turn off mouse acceleration on OS X you need to open up a terminal and type
      defaults write .GlobalPreferences com.apple.mouse.scaling -1
      Then log out and back in, and frankly it still feels off. There is no way at all, short of installing 3rd party software, of turning off mouse wheel acceleration.

      Mac keyboards use some weird ANSI / ISO hybrid keyboard layout if you're a UK user. If you plug in a PC ISO keyboard, then it will swap around a bunch of the keys (not just the @ and " keys). To make matters worse, I don't use the qwerty layout, and I cannot find a PC ISO Colemak layout for Mac. Karabiner used to let you fix the problem, but that no longer works (since it's classified as a keyboard logger). Ukelele lets you create new keyboard layouts... apparently. I struggled for several hours before giving up.

      As for applications that still won't work properly with retina displays: MS Office, all the font and style previews are blocky. Inkscape, it's the entire application (apparently because it relies on XQuartz, which might never get retina support). It's certainly been getting better, but retina has been available for several years now.

      So I'm left with a mouse profile and keyboard layout that just don't feel right and that I can't seem to fix. Certainly, it wasn't trivial to fix on Linux, but I did manage to figure it out, whereas I gave up trying on OS X. You might rightly say "these are some pretty niche problems", and maybe you're right, but they're pretty important to me, so that's been my experience with OS X.

  2. Imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple is incredibly anti-consumer and anti-environment to milk tiny amounts of additional profit. I am so shocked...

    1. Re:Imagine that by MouseR · · Score: 2

      You can install bleeding edge OS version (iOS 10.3 in this case) on a five year old iPhone (or iPod Touch) 5.

      Try that on another smart phone, regardless of brand.

      Yes, consumer is first at Apple. Because they dont serve the business well and even those old phones can still make iTunes purchase.

    2. Re:Imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YMMV. Having a few years ago to get some life out of an iPad my experience was the opposite. (Ignoring the apparent need to use iTunes to get it upgraded.) Managed to get it upgraded as far as it would go but the AppStore experience was terrible. Not much seemed to be available and finding what would work was painful.

    3. Re:Imagine that by jawtheshark · · Score: 1
      I am still using my iPhone 5. It's on it's third battery though, and the current one is (again) bulging. I need to find a better battery supplier.

      What I do think, is that upon the next iOS refresh, they'll go full 64-bit and then the iPhone 5 will be out.

      At that point I might get my wifes old iPhone 6 (She always gets the newest, I take her old one), but I really prefer the iPhone 5 form factor. I might splurge one an SE instead.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    4. Re:Imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Name one other company that tries to install OSes designed for modern generation hardware on 3-4 generations prior.

      There's none, because the user experience would be shit -- slow, laggy, slow boot ups, etc. Remember, most of the smoothness comes from screenshot-image manipulation and not real-time rendering while suspending all other functions. There's only so much they can do for load times or things that actually require a decent CPU. There's plenty of people on their own forums complaining about slowness and such.

      The worst part is that you can't roll back once you upgrade.

    5. Re:Imagine that by Bongo · · Score: 1

      In my experience, iPad 1 was obsolete pretty much in just 18 months.

      iPad 4 (nearly 5 years old) still runs current iOS and is quite usable.

      The ARM stuff just got so much faster early on.

      The ecosystem/cloud/ubiquitous computing model is pretty good in this respect, as no-one can afford to bring out an update that renders all the other gadgets obsolete overnight, well, not too often anyway.

    6. Re:Imagine that by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      The iPad 1 was obsolete pretty much the day it launched - they launched it extremely close to the iPhone 4, but they gave the iPhone 4 twice the amount of RAM, meaning that the flagship brand new Apple tablet already couldn't run all the apps available...

    7. Re:Imagine that by MouseR · · Score: 1

      You can roll back. You download the ipsw archives and install with iTunes.

    8. Re:Imagine that by crmarvin42 · · Score: 1

      You are apparently unaware of the Apple Refurbished page. Devices that can be refurbished and resold are sold. Devices that cannot be refurbished economically are recycled. They currently list products in every major category (Mac, Macbook, iPad, iPhone, iPod, AppleWatch, AppleTV) on their refurbished page https://www.apple.com/shop/bro...

      Not every device can or should be repaired. I've returned devices where the exact fault couldn't be determined. It is very much pro consumer to shred that machine instead of risking selling someone a device with a hidden flaw.

      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
    9. Re:Imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They manage this in China so why not elsewhere ?

    10. Re:Imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I understand it, "refurbished" products (in the entire electronics industry, not just apple) are relatively new products that have been returned either because of whim (need to be re-boxed, re-formatted, re-crypted) or possibly because of "infant mortality" problems during the initial warranty period. They don't refurbish things that were used by a customer for a year or more, which the items in question here would be.

    11. Re:Imagine that by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Apple is incredibly anti-consumer and anti-environment to milk tiny amounts of additional profit. I am so shocked...

      Yeah, that's why they keep winning customer satisfaction and environmental awards.

  3. "it works with" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple solution: Don't "work with" them. If you don't have any special deals in place, then Apple can't do shit - the first sale doctrine is all that matters.

  4. Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/lin by caseih · · Score: 1, Informative

    Taking an old PC and repurposing it with Linux, or even an older version of MS Windows (say 7) is much easier than working with Macs. Apple's software ecosystem is designed around planned obsolescence. Old computers simply can't run the latest versions of macOS yet the ecosystem pretty much requires it. Much Mac software won't run on versions of OS X prior to 10.8 these days. This combined with Apple's apparently heavy-handed tactics with recyclers really make Macs poor in the recycling department as compared to Windows and Linux. It is possible to run either Windows or Linux on an older Mac, of course. Maybe that's an option for recyclers.

  5. Green Policies by Kunedog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Green policies are for PR, not for everyday use.

    1. Re:Green Policies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in the 90s I briefly worked at a large well known non profit that championed the environment. Behind the scenes it was a horror show of greed at executive level and terrible treatment of everyone below. The lower lever workers, most at or below minimum wage were kept in the bottom floors of the complex and not allowed on the management floors, not even to access the plush cafeteria for food. They were also forced to use the rear doors to enter and exit the building, and yes quite a few were black. All stakeholders cared about were the massive amounts of donations and didn't even pretend to care about the environment. Felt as though I were in a sickening dystopian parody movie.

    2. Re:Green Policies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite a few were black...and the other races can well fuck themselves and deserve to be poorly treated. FUCK YOU

  6. Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would they resale, repurpose, reuse? They separate the raw materials.

    1. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by mellon · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yup, the idea that components can be reused is absurd. If you can take a macbook and suck all the material out of it and turn it back to input, that's actually a much better result than keeping it running: battery tech has improved, power consumption is down, etc. I suppose it's a criticism of modern computers that they aren't modular the way PCs used to be, but this isn't really something Apple invented. What the hell else am I supposed to do with an old computer that isn't working anymore? Repair is likely to cost as much as buying a new one, so if you can't recycle everything, the alternative is landfill.

    2. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because not only is it incredibly environmentally irresponsible to shred usable components, it's also far less profitable.

      The only party benefited by this is Apple.

      And no, they're not the only manufacturer guilty of this. And I do mean guilty - contracts like this are unconscionable, contrary to good public policy, and should be prohibited.

    3. Re: Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly .... If re-selling it at 10% of what it cost the first time produces less overall solution than it ending up in a landfill the it's an overall win.. Unless you "can't" do that because of apples reasons...

    4. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by jenningsthecat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Say what?

      Yup, the idea that components can be reused is absurd.

      While re-using parts soldered onto PCB's is usually not practical, there certainly ARE components such as keyboards, displays, and drives that could well be re-used. But that's not even the real point - in may cases we're talking about fully functional devices that are being shredded. That's outright fucking criminal. Each device represents a huge investment of energy - therefore each device should be used as long as it works and someone wants it. Destroying fully functional equipment 'because business' or 'because shareholders' is stupid, shortsighted, and immoral.

      Repair is likely to cost as much as buying a new one...

      'Uneconomical to repair'? Most often these days, that's a pile of contrived bullshit. Manufacturers set it up that way. They do so partly by purposely making equipment difficult or impossible to service, and by charging scandalous prices for replacement parts. They also do it by having artificially low prices for their goods. If the REAL costs were factored in, (depletion of natural resources, environmental damage, climate change, the human costs of slave labour, etc.), goods would be much more expensive to purchase, as they should be. Repairability and longevity would then be not only cost-effective, but necessary, and the market for used equipment would be huge. Instead, we have companies fattening their bottom lines at the expense of future generations, in the service of a Ponzi scheme of an economy whose only guiding principle is "more growth is better, and unlimited growth is best". Which, incidentally, is the guiding principle of cancer, infections, and a whole host of other similar phenomena which rob human beings of life and dignity.

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    5. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, both are valid points. The end-game of this argument is just don't buy crap like this in the first place. As long as landfill fodder continues to be consumed, then what mellon said makes more sense.

    6. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this marked insightful? Reuse is the best option always. Recycling takes huge amounts of energy. It's not as much as the original manufacture, but it's still enormous. And if you're talking about sucking the materials out and turning it back into inputs, especially in the world of electronics, that's some nasty chemicals. To reform the silicon requires creating a bromine compound if I remember correctly (I think it's silicon tetrabromine, it's a liquid you drip in water and sand falls out, it's really cool but extremely toxic, they do it because they can use recrystalization to purify the silicon). Extracting gold is either a cyanide process, a mercury process or hydrochloric and nitric acid process, where I believe the cyanide way is the most commonly used. The aluminum requires huge electrical smelters to reprocess.

      It may not be as good as the new stuff, but environmentally it's way, way better to reuse than to recycle, much as it's way way better to recycle than to create new. It's kind of like cars, the most environmentally friendly thing you can do is to keep driving the car you have until it dies. Unless your car is extremely inefficient, the energy that goes into making a new one will almost certainly not be recovered by improved efficiency, and this holds true even when comparing old ICE vehicles to new EVs.

    7. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When something becomes a commodity, it is cheaper to replace than to repair. It's not a giant conspiracy to rob people of "dignity" and give everyone cancer.

      Roll back the rhetoric... it's not about evil corporations. It's about cost and practicality. When PC's cost $5000, repairing them was a no-brainer. When they became $300, repair doesn't make a lick of sense.

      That's not to say that Apple is doing a dick thing by scrapping good equipment to artificially inflate demand for their new equipment (people would gladly pay less for an older model, just look at automobiles.) But the greater "workers of the world unite" bullshit in your post is just that.... bullshit.

    8. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "criminal"

      AFAIK it's not against the law, otherwise we'd hear about people being arrested for shredding their iPhones.

    9. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by mellon · · Score: 1

      This isn't true. Reusing your 20-year-old refrigerator is way worse than recycling it, for example. Old computers draw a lot more power than newer computers that do more work. Etc. Sure, if the thing still works and is relatively new, keep using it, but the idea that we should keep using 20-year-old computers rather than recycling them isn't true.

    10. Re:Recyclers forced to recycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, watch the Louise Rossmann youtube video "why I don't use Apple products":

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfrYOWlKJ_g

      This guy is expert in macbook repair but he acknowledges how difficult this is given Apple provides no repair information and does not sell any parts to third party repair shops. Apple deliberately hinders repair and reuse of older Apple products so that they can you new ones for more profit!

  7. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My 2010 MacBook Pro disagrees with you. Running the latest version of macOS very well thanks.

    Your post was essentially fact free and biased garbage.

  8. Data Destruction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thank you Apple for ensuring the data on my old phone won't be compromised.

    1. Re: Data Destruction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come over here so we can assure you that the data on your current iPhone won't be compromised.

  9. There are alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Screw Apple. Here's a link that lets you search from a comprehensive list of local non-profit computer re-purposers (scroll down the page a bit):

    National Christina Foundation

    1. Re:There are alternatives... by TRRosen · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty sure none of them want broken computers. Apple sells tons of computers as refurbs. if they can be fixed they're resold if they can't be they're recycled.

    2. Re:There are alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This!

      I think the hater and bashers do not realize that what is recycled this way is what they cannot salvage or refurb, and so it the only way it all does not end up in a landfill ...

      People wanting to repurpose old hardware can also do so like with a windows machine, so why the hate?

      More trolls on /. lately

    3. Re: There are alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hater and basher are the kind of terms scientologists and moonies use to describe anybody not dosed enough with their koolaide.

  10. Imagine this... by Excelcia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, how about imagine this scenario. Let's say Apple's recyclers are allowed to recycle components. NAND flash chips from all sorts of devices are collected - how long before some very embarrassing, sensitive, or even damaging information thought deleted from someone's phone is recovered from one of those chips?

    While I am no fan of Apple nor their business practices, their current recycling method represents the best they can do while taking the precautions they need to take to ensure safety. They can't allow any chips out, or else once that door is opened it's only a matter of time before the wrong chips get out. Shredding the devices and putting policies in place to ensure they are /all/ shredded represents the best they can hope for.

    And yes, before a phone is turned in it /should/ be wiped of anything sensitive, but do /you/ know how to ensure every bit of data is cleaned off your phone at the flash level?

    1. Re: Imagine this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If what you say is true, then what about people that sell used iPhones?

    2. Re:Imagine this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even the CIA needs a third party from Israel to decrypt those iPhone chips. I thought all iPhones have built-in specialized AES256 encryption chip.

    3. Re:Imagine this... by mjpaci · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm talking about the 686 prototypes, with the artificial intelligence RISC chip.

    4. Re:Imagine this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And could be done simply by removing hdd/ssd from the devices while not shredding the entire device.

    5. Re:Imagine this... by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      ... do /you/ know how to ensure every bit of data is cleaned off your phone at the flash level?

      No, but Apple does (so do others); they could easily bake this functionality into their devices.

      But ignore this for a moment, shall we? The plain fact of the matter is most phones are just not that interesting. A factory reset is enough for the vast majority of users.

  11. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Karlt1 · · Score: 2

    Old computers simply can't run the latest versions of macOS yet the ecosystem pretty much requires it.

    Tell that to my mom who is running Windows 7 on my old 2006 Era Core Duo 1.66mhz Mac Mini.

    Apple abandoned it years ago with 10.6 but it runs Windows 7 decently well.

  12. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by roc97007 · · Score: 1, Funny

    My 2000 PC running Windows 10 disagrees with your 2010 Macbook Pro. As does my late '90's laptop running Mint.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  13. taking an idea from Samsung... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    all iPhones will self-immolate at 24 months.

    1. Re:taking an idea from Samsung... by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Except that somebody misread the memo at Samsung and set it at 24 days.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  14. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by J.+T.+MacLeod · · Score: 1

    MacOS support for older hardware is not terrible. While it may not stretch back a full decade, it wasn't until recently that you could say Windows worked on decade-old hardware.

    And since you bring up Linux... Linux is a great way to bring modern software to old Mac hardware.

  15. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Uberbah · · Score: 0

    My 2000 PC running Windows 10 disagrees with your 2010 Macbook Pro

    No, it doesn't. Because the 2010 Macbook is going to actually be usable with modern applications as long as they're not games requiring a newer CPU or GPU.

  16. This won't really matter by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This doesn't change anything. The people who buy into Apple mindshare will continue to buy Apple, and the rest of us will continue to repurpose old hardware for new roles and pretty much ignore the shiny trendy things. And there will be enough Apple fans for Apple to continue to make boatloads of money. And many of those fans will be all hyped up to save the earth and recycle everything and battle global warming, while not even recognizing the irony of throwing away an $800 phone every 18 months.

    But we will, apparently, continue to argue about it.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:This won't really matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure exactly what you are talking about. Most people, even Apple users, are tight on money, are not enthusiastic about dropping big bucks on Apple's yearly hardware revisions. Specific to iPhones, while Apple may destroy hardware, there is still a huge refurb market so not all phones have a usage life. I agree about the irony of their products relatively short lifecycles, 18 months is probably average in the cell phone market, and it's unfortunate that making a phone that lasts 3-4 years is counterproductive to business' bottom lines.

      For what it's worth, I don't buy Apple because it's shiny. I buy it because unlike most Windows based stuff I deal with on a daily basis, their wares function reliably and are well integrated.

    2. Re: This won't really matter by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

      I'd rather have 1 new MacBook than 10 old Thinkpads.

    3. Re: This won't really matter by jawtheshark · · Score: 1
      Don't diss old Thinkpads. I got myself a Thinkpad X220 (Intel Sandy Bridge) for 179EUR recently and given the form factor (12") and the fact you can slap in 16GB RAM (99EUR) and a SSD suiting your needs (I went for 128GB, I don't need much - 49EUR), I have kick ass machine for 327EUR total. It even still has 85% of battery capacity left. Getting replacement batteries is no problem for Thinkpads, but right now this is sufficient.

      That's netbook prices, for mid-level laptop (typically 15") performance. Granted... Pre-owned, but we are talking about recycling.

      It comes with a 7 license, I upgraded it to 10 with the "assistive technologies" upgrade and now I can choose to run 7 or 10 on it... This is mainly for the day, I want to pass it on to a new user. I simply run Linux on it and everything works out of the box.

      Granted, I have no idea what I'd do with 10 of them and a new MacBook sure would be nice... but for the thrifty, I'd suggest getting a Thinkpad any time

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    4. Re: This won't really matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would rather have 1 new thinkpad than 10 old crappy macbooks! BTW, I do have a macbook air, the thing crapped out on me the other day stuck on boot, and no amount of special key combo can bring it back. So I had to unscrew the bottom and pull out the battery and violla! it was fixed. So smart of Apple to make the battery built in.

  17. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dude, you've completely missed the point - on average, Macs running Mac OS last in active use longer than most Wintel hardware. I've seen organisations run fleets of Macs w/o upgrading the hardware, that exceed Windows XP's software lifetimes. The 10.8 comment is almost irrelevant - you know the Mac App Store automatically provides OLD versions to OLD OS versions that can't run the latest version of an App, don't you ?

    This article is nothing to do with planned obsolescence - its about devices that are broken beyond economic repair or maybe need high risk / low yield repairs - sure you might be able to desolder and replace components at a surface mount level on a multi-layer board, but doing that at scale, you cause secondary damage a fraction of the time, and the technician time rapidly ends up outweighing the hardware costs.

    Apple policy means that half repaired but forensically recoverable storage isn't thrown out in the trash (as an example).

  18. Any propoganda is bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact is, Apple is built on propoganda. Their total investment of an iPhone after it arrives in the store is only usd50.

    The hardware is always 2 generations behind modern and the softwate is constricted to a seamless user interaction with software administrative privileges withheld from the owner or lessee.

    Other non Apple manufacturers have tried this, like Samsung and LG claiming to own all data and the hardware itself, and they just look foolish when the software is 3rd party.

    The original propoganda is that these are phones tgat can be searched under shitty "transmitting utility" codes that bring Unites States out of Washington DC. These are computers used less for communicating, a complete disrespect of concept even by Amateur Radio Relay League.standards.

    1. Re:Any propoganda is bad. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Is there even one truthful statement in your comment, beyond the subject?

    2. Re:Any propoganda is bad. by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      The fact is, Apple is built on propoganda. Their total investment of an iPhone after it arrives in the store is only usd50.

      The hardware is always 2 generations behind modern and the softwate is constricted to a seamless user interaction with software administrative privileges withheld from the owner or lessee.

      Other non Apple manufacturers have tried this, like Samsung and LG claiming to own all data and the hardware itself, and they just look foolish when the software is 3rd party.

      The original propoganda is that these are phones tgat can be searched under shitty "transmitting utility" codes that bring Unites States out of Washington DC. These are computers used less for communicating, a complete disrespect of concept even by Amateur Radio Relay League.standards.

      100% LYING BULLSHIT.

      FOAD.

  19. Recycling data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I really like when my personal data gets recycled and reused, by someone else!!!

    1. Re:Recycling data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why are you trashing or recycling devices without even a cursory attempt at removal of your personal data?
       

  20. In Reality by n329619 · · Score: 1

    Recyclers will receive "gifts" with unusable parts for shedding from the macbook repairmen, while the repairmen will receive "gifts" with usable parts from the recyclers.

    In the meantime, Apple will continue to feel better about themselves.

  21. Apple is the Ultimate in Propoganda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    off the boat.

    finite mineral sources, maximum exploit.

    only usd50 off the boatdocked into the store.

    shameful teplacement of a netbook computer

  22. The Trouble with Repurposing old Computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A different band of environmentalists will take you to court and dox you for refusing to melt down that old PC and fabricate by hand from the raw materials yielded, a new machine with an identical technical spec and reduced power consumption from the new processes.

    1. Re:The Trouble with Repurposing old Computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another band will brand you a cartoon villain for exporting old PC, phone, monitors and parts to the third world. They'll film the shit hole's shit hole where children burn the cables, boards and stuff from old TVs and computers discarded by the third worlders themselves, while those up the chain are busy installing LCD panels on laptops, fixing mobile phones or installing pirated Windows on a pallet worth of SFF Core 2 Duo Dells.
      (and running memtest, soldering capacitors etc.)

      In the end, the ultimate recycling plant should be located there but it need be built, fenced, guarded, powered, supplied and is a money sink in general. So that's not easy.

      and fabricate by hand from the raw materials yielded, a new machine with an identical technical spec and reduced power consumption from the new processes.

      I'm not sure that's quite feasible. Turning shredded CPU and RAM into a 99.999% silicon crystal and elements and chemicals needed? At worst, it looks like reversing entropy.

  23. except the NAND is encrypted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless they've been blatantly lying to everyone, the non-volatile memory is encrypted.

  24. I haven't had an iPhone since the 4 by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    that I didn't replace in 2 years when the hardware got flaky/crashy. The 5 overheats. A lot. I'm an Android guy because for $250 bucks I can buy a nice phone. But my kid's stuck on Apple because of iMessage (which is less a messaging app and more a sort of mini social network). Anyway, ain't nobody recycling the iPhone 5.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I haven't had an iPhone since the 4 by RotateLeftByte · · Score: 1

      One UK MNVO is still offering the iPhone 5S on a 24 month deal.
      Go figure!!!!!!!

      --
      I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
  25. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taking an old PC and repurposing it with Linux, or even an older version of MS Windows (say 7) is much easier than working with Macs.

    Funny, I kinda feel that way about any version of Windows. Maybe it's because I'm so accustomed to using my Mac. Actually I find them all about equally easy to use. The only people I know who complain about "how hard it is to use a Mac" seem to be those who have already decided – before ever even trying – that it's going to be hard. And then – amazingly – it is. Whodathunkit?

    Apple's software ecosystem is designed around planned obsolescence. Old computers simply can't run the latest versions of macOS ...

    I've got a 2008 MB Air that is running the latest Mac OS X. I've got four Mac Minis. Only the oldest – the first Intel-based Mini, circa 2006 or 2007 – won't update past OS X 10.10 IIRC. All the others are running 10.12. And the other person who replied to you with his 2010 MacBook. You're just basically talking smack out your ass.

    yet the ecosystem pretty much requires it.

    Huh?

    Much Mac software won't run on versions of OS X prior to 10.8 these days.

    Could be. I wouldn't know, because five out of the six Macs I own are all running 10.12. And the other one – running 10.10 – is still running all the software that's on it.

    This combined with Apple's apparently heavy-handed tactics with recyclers really make Macs poor in the recycling department as compared to Windows and Linux.

    Lessee. If I sell a premium product, would I really want to return scuffed up, used screens and cases to the repair industry? What's left? A circuit card and a battery. Frankly, knowing a little bit about the industry, I'd guess the most efficient thing to do with any of those is to shred them. The cost of sorting, cleaning, testing; it's not worth it. What other industry routinely repairs their customers' products? Oh, pick one at random. Hmmm. Hmmm. Hmmmm. Okay, cars. You come in to a repair shop with a dented fender and broken headlamp. I'd wager 9 times out of 10 you're going to get new a new fender and a new headlamp assembly and the old parts are going to be sent off to be crushed, shredded, and melted down. Okay, maybe a quarter panel or a door gets some bondo slapped on it instead. That's because the average person can't tell, and isn't going to be looking at their car door eight inches (20cm) from their nose for the next few years.

    It is possible to run either Windows or Linux on an older Mac, of course. Maybe that's an option for recyclers.

    Is that you Kellyann? Actually, it's possible to run Windows and Linux on brand new Macs. I wonder why more people don't? Could it be because – just because – it's a better UX than either Windows or Linux? Frankly, I don't get what your point is. And your propensity for lying (Alternate Facts is what I think you call them, don't you Kellyann?) would suggest that you're probably on the short list to replace Sean Spicer. Not that that would be much of an improvement.

  26. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oops, sorry, I modded down the wrong article. Well, since you posted as AC you probably won't mind too much. Still, sorry about that.

  27. Open Architecture cell phone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    imagine a Magma passive pci bus and each company installs their proprieraey service on that bus.

    Shouldnt the cell phone be done the same way? Peripherals the size of a sodimm ram just insert behind the screen. The industry thinks it can tie everything down but that is what created the homebrew PC clone industry.

  28. Long a common practice in the industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Back in the 80s a friend worked at a warehouse that handled office machines coming off lease. Early PCs, word processing equipment, mini computer stuff etc. They were all destroyed to avoid leakage onto the used market. EVERYTHING was tracked thoroughly, which was uncommon back then. Given this warehouse handled a fortune in equipment they took security seriously. Any employees caught pilfering were not only fired but prosecuted for reals.

    I looked around inside and it was painful realizing this mountain of still working equipment was all doomed to the cruncher instead of any rational use.

  29. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, XP SP3 likely worked on a Pentium II 233 with a RAM upgrade to 256MB or better.
    Likely on Pentium Pro 200 or 180 machines, those tended to come with SCSI, have dual processor but the DIMM EDO memory was rare. So, back to the junk pile and farewell you $10k piece of junk.

    Realistically, whatever the OS every computer not powerful enough to cope with 240p youtube became junk quite quickly but in theory, as long as you had enough RAM and perhaps storage space you still could use any crappy PC, up to Windows 7 but I guess a PC from 1999 with 1GB RAM is not common.

  30. Environmental Hypocrisy by Pauldow · · Score: 1

    I found an iPad that had a cracked screen at my local dump. I was able to replace the glass, and got it started. I factory reset it, which was probably a mistake. The serial number is locked to an iCloud account. I can't even take it to an Apple store to have them contact the previous owner to see if they want it (heck, I'll give it back free), or if they'll release the serial number. I haven't bought an Apple product in years. You can tell how well my revenge is working based on what their stock price has done the past decade.

    Apple gives us another reason they hate people too. They make the model and serial numbers too small for a human to read.

    1. Re:Environmental Hypocrisy by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      They make the model and serial numbers too small for a human to read.

      Take a picture and zoom in. It's about the only way to read some coin-style battery numbers, cooking instructions on packages with small white text on orange backgrounds, etc. Sometimes you don't even need to take a picture - zooming in with the camera on your phone can be enough.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Environmental Hypocrisy by snookiex · · Score: 1

      Or use, you know, a good old magnifying glass.

      --
      Open Source Network Inventory for the masses! Kuwaiba
    3. Re:Environmental Hypocrisy by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'm sufficiently nearsighted so that, with my glasses off, I can focus nicely at a distance just beyond the end of my nose. Who needs a magnifying glass?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    4. Re:Environmental Hypocrisy by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Use a magnifying glass? Most people don't carry a magnifying glass around, and most magnifying glasses don't magnify as much as a smartphone camera can. Plus, if you take a picture, you don't have to trust your memory for a part number or whatever. Hence the expression "Take a picture - it will last longer."

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  31. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by thebullshitpatrol · · Score: 1

    >yfw windows 7 and kaby lake are not compatible with one another

    get real dude. you can run sierra on 10 year old hardware. apple can be accused of many things, however planned obsolescence is not one. remind me again how many years of major updates you get with a Pixel?

  32. Load of BS by TRRosen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple doesn't force anybody to do anything here. People hired by Apple are expected to do what Apple hired them to do. Apple refurbs and resells tons of devices. what it can't it recycles. Every junkyard in the world crushes tons of cars with usable parts. there simply comes a point when they are not worth the work required to reclaim them.

  33. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    No, it doesn't. Because the 2010 Macbook is going to actually be usable with modern applications as long as they're not games requiring a newer CPU or GPU.

    And so long as they don't require newer API functionality of a newer version of OSX. Oh, and I would avoid connecting it to the internet.

  34. Sounds like a market opportunity to me by blindseer · · Score: 1

    As much as people are upset about this there is a very logical solution to this, get in the recycling business. I imagine that a lot of people out there can't just get in the recycling business themselves but they have the choice on how they recycle their aged and/or broken electronics. You don't have to send your old MacBook to Apple, find a recycler that will not simply shred it into confetti. A question comes to mind, how did we get ourselves in this interesting situation?

    Here's a problem that I see. The government decided that to make sure old electronics did not end up in landfills they forced the manufacturers to accept old devices and have them "recycled". There are many forms of recycling, as made clear in the article, but the government did not specify the form of this recycling and/or did not prevent the manufacturers to place conditions on third party recyclers they hired out.

    Seems to me that if we want to see this practice stop then we should remove the requirement that manufacturers recycle their old devices. The problem is the government got involved. Without government getting involved in this the producers of these electronics would not be in a position to shred their competition.

    I see more and more examples as time goes on where Ronald Reagan got it right. Government is quite often not the solution, it is the problem.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    1. Re:Sounds like a market opportunity to me by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      What parts in an iPad 2 are worth reclaiming? Nobody wants a tablet with iPad 2 vintage components in it. Also, getting them out of the device undamaged would probably be less efficient than shredding it and sorting the materials afterwards.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    2. Re:Sounds like a market opportunity to me by blindseer · · Score: 1

      "Nobody wants a tablet with iPad 2 vintage components in it. "

      If that were true then Apple would not feel any motivation to specify that they be destroyed. If Apple did not see them as potentially valuable to competitors then they'd do nothing since it would avoid any friction from potential recycling contractors and also avoid any possibility of bad press if this contractual obligation got out. My guess is that there were many people at Apple that did this math but perhaps did not anticipate all the factors properly because we are talking about it now.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    3. Re:Sounds like a market opportunity to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err... how can you get into the recycling business when:
      1) Users using i devices tend to trust APL to do the responsible thing. People buying high end expect organic fair trade eco-friendly products (I joke, but you get the point.) Nobody will trust your small company nobody's ever heard of.

      2) You assume APL won't sue you to hell for some shitty reason for some stupid reason to knock your company out for touching their shit (we're concerned about user privacy). You can't say they won't, because they've been petty before ("no reasonable person would believe our ads")

      3) The government regulation does not prohibit another company from taking in recycling. There's nothing stopping anyone right now, or even a few decades ago, from starting their company. Before government recycling regulations (past 2-3 decades), companies and people just dumped shit all over the place - into streams.(remember the Erin Brockovich movie? remember all the coal mines?) and random land Your way has already been tried and it doesn't work. All it takes is one irresponsible company to poison millions.

      I'll cut off those who will remind me about Flint happened ONCE and the right jumps all over the government for screwing up once for trying to be cheap... did they forget other companies dumped random shit into the water INTENTIONALLY and covering it up was normal back in the day?

      4) Recycling isn't going to make much money, if at all. Most recycling companies must find and transport (or lie / mislead, I guess) old gear, buy equipment, etc, etc. Then they have to resell the money at higher prices because most recycling companies hire and pay locally. With strip mines employing slave-labour like conditions, the raw material is often cheaper to dig, find, process and ship (again, gold standard for companies -- blood diamonds anyone?).

      5) I wouldn't have been surprised if people who believe as you do but are in the political arena hampered the bill proclaiming the same things you do. The people who wanted the "teeth" had to back off to push the bill as it is through.

      So yeah, if you think poisoning millions of people because you trust companies to do the right thing, then by all means revoke the gov't environmental regulations.

  35. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by dbIII · · Score: 1

    You have a bit of a point, but I disagree since I've got an old PowerPC eMac that still works with OSX (I failed to put FreeBSD on it).
    While it cannot run a recent version of OSX it does get updates for applications such as Safari and iTunes.

  36. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by caseih · · Score: 1

    Flamebait, really? The Apple fanbois must be trolling tonight.

    I should have added the disclaimer, "in my experience."

  37. Yes, because Apple buyers aren't paranoid idiots. by Brannon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple doesn't do anything to prevent anyone from reselling or giving away an iPhone or Mac--there is a thriving reseller market for both. Macs hold their value much better than PCs do, for example; specifically because they last longer. Apple itself has a refurbishment program that resells pre-owned Macs & iPhones.

    This is just about what happens when Apple sends some old device to an authorized recycler. Should Apple allow that recycler to piece out individual parts and sell them on a gray market? possibly selling hard drives with customer data still on them? Or should Apple insist that they shred the devices and recycle them.

    Reasonable people could disagree about which strategy is more responsible--but in the grand scheme of things to get pissed about, this is pretty lame. Do you have any idea how many electronic devices don't get recycled at all? Who recycles your old cable box? Who recycles your shoes?

    It's increasingly difficult to tell the difference between Slashdot and Breitbart--the same sort of manufactured outrage exist on both.

  38. Reuse materials by blocked_lol · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It stands to reason, though, that if they want to make phones from reused materials then they have to strip everything down to the raw materials so they can reuse them, no?

    > After sorting, the materials are sold and used for production stock in new products. No reuse. No parts harvesting. No resale.

    Sounds like they're recycling the raw materials, just not the parts. Not 100% ideal, but it beats them winding up in a landfill.

  39. Yawn, millions of iPhone 5's are recycled. by Brannon · · Score: 0

    Do you have access to youtube on your rickety Android junk?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJc9XDWB-Bc

  40. The free market will solve global warming... by Brannon · · Score: 1

    if that even exists.

    1. Re:The free market will solve global warming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no such thing as a free market.

  41. Apples intention is clear by no-body · · Score: 1

    Hamper reusing older equipment anywhere in the world by forcing recyclers to make it unusable - shredding it into small pieces.

    Corporate rape, goes the same route as this:

    http://www.npr.org/sections/al...

       

  42. Different strokes for different folks by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Apple shreds theirs, while Samsung prefers to burn theirs.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  43. How dare recyclers recycle! by radarskiy · · Score: 2

    If the devices can be repaired or reused, people wouldn't be sending them to recyclers.

    "Grandstanding effort" indeed, just not grandstanding by Apple.

    1. Re:How dare recyclers recycle! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      If the devices can be repaired or reused, people wouldn't be sending them to recyclers.

      Rubbish!

      (see what I did there?) But seriously, you are just making stuff up. People throw out all sorts or working or repairable stuff.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:How dare recyclers recycle! by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Apple will refurbish and resell devices that can be rescued.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    3. Re:How dare recyclers recycle! by AnalPrincess69 · · Score: 1

      I use an iPhone 2G as my daily phone. It doens't have the original iOS firmware on it. I installed Whited00r on it and now it hass all up to date apps and works better than my brother's iPhone 7+. That has 256GB of storage and that is slow. My iPhone 2G boots up 32x faster than that crappy iPhone 7+. I still have warranty on my iPhone 2G so if anything goes wrong I can just take it right back to apple and they can give me a new one

    4. Re:How dare recyclers recycle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [citation needed]

      They might refurbish very new stuff (owned by the customer for not more than a few months), but not once it's been used for a while.

    5. Re:How dare recyclers recycle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >If the devices can be repaired or reused, people wouldn't be sending them to recyclers.

      Yes they will. People do not like to be inconvenienced. And they WILL toss things that are repairable. Don't forget the oh so embarrassment of using last year's device. To people, dismissing an object is preferable to sending something on a cool productive path. That's too responsible- so they toss stuff left & right.

      But to recycling companies, they COULD do something nice with broken devices:
      - rebuild something from multiple parts.
      - disassemble (not shred) to pull valuable metals off the boards. Silver comes to mind instantly!

      But these take time and above all else... an interest by companies & employees to do it.

    6. Re:How dare recyclers recycle! by j-beda · · Score: 1

      I use an iPhone 2G as my daily phone. It doens't have the original iOS firmware on it. I installed Whited00r on it and now it hass all up to date apps and works better than my brother's iPhone 7+. That has 256GB of storage and that is slow. My iPhone 2G boots up 32x faster than that crappy iPhone 7+. I still have warranty on my iPhone 2G so if anything goes wrong I can just take it right back to apple and they can give me a new one

      I had never heard of an "iPhone 2G", so when I looked for it I found it is an unofficial name for the first generation iPhone; I guess since the following iphone was called the "iPhone 3G"

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Anyhow, it was discontinued in the middle of 2009, almost eight years ago. As extended Apple warranty coverage lasts only 3 years, it seems very unlikely that any would still be covered.

  44. I am going to stand up for Apple for once by avandesande · · Score: 2

    So let me get this straight, people turn stuff in to apple and and sends them to a recycler to have them recycled to for some contract price. Why in gods name would apple let them profiteer by reselling them instead? That would be nuts.

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
    1. Re:I am going to stand up for Apple for once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why in gods name would apple let them profiteer by reselling them instead?

      That is what "recycling" is! You take things appart to a point where it makes sense to sell the result. Wether it is components or raw materials. Apple just wants to ensure that its environmentally unregulated chinese death camps are the only source of Apple(TM) chips. Or are you suggesting these recyclers should just ship everything Apple gives them to the Mariana Trench instead of reselling the result of their work? That definition of recycling would require quite a bite of courage.

    2. Re:I am going to stand up for Apple for once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Calm down and take a few hits from your inhaler.

    3. Re:I am going to stand up for Apple for once by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. In that order.

      I get where Apple is coming from. If the entire point is to prevent the reselling of used parts for profit, thus creating fraud among a market where truly validated refurbished parts exist, then the solution is to just mark them. Mark them with a logo (embossed, laser etched, etc) so that the end consumer knows willingly that the case is not new and not refurbished, rather reused as-is in current condition. I promise, there would be a market for those parts in 3rd world nations. Hell, might even acceptable in 1st world too. But we all know why Apple doesn't want to do this. It would flood and saturate the market adding to competition of bringing new products to market.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re: I am going to stand up for Apple for once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only Apple (and only the low tax part of Apple in Ireland) should be allowed to make a profit.

  45. Prevent reuse of your data by Vitus+Wagner · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Apple does a good job to prevent some advertisement company or other cybercriminal gang to reuse data you left on the hard disk of broken notebook or flash memory of your phone.

  46. Not surprising in the least... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone who thinks Apple cares about recycling is completely blind to what is really happening behind the scenes.

    Not only Apple does not recycle crap, they also are actively spending money via lobbying to kill stuff like the right to repair bill which would help independent repair shops to fix iPhones, Macs and whatnot and prolong their lives.
    The "official repair" Apple does usually ammounts to throwing away easily repairable units to force costumers to buy refurbished models or newer ones, and they are constantly pushing towards strategies to block independent repair efforts with stuff like error 53 and the more recent software blocking of fingerprint reader replacement on the iPhone 7.

    With crap like eliminating "legacy ports" like the headphone jack due to them being "corageous", they've effectively pushed more bluetooth headsets and more dongles into the market which has even more toxic and non-recyclable materials that will be purchased in greater number and will be replaced or lost in a more constant rate, instead of regular headphones that requires less electronic parts.

    But the company couldn't care less as long as they are making truckloads of money, which is something most corporations do anyways. It's just damn insulting that they keep trying to push this bullshit and that parts of the press swallow it whole. F*cking predatory company that keeps feeding on public misinformation.

    It's known that there are no easy ways of disassembling and reusing old phones component parts to make new ones because it just costs too much more to recover whatever materials were used, but they have no qualms on feeding on regular costumers lack of knowledge on this to paint themselves as a good company that is trying to do "something" about it. Protip for those who don't know about this: it'll result in nothing, and they already know it. It's a token effort. There are no good ways of harvesting raw materials for eWaste to make new components in a financially viable manner, because if there was everyone would be doing it.

    Currently, anyone that is well informed or an active part of the problem know full well that the best way of generating less waste is to use electronics for as long as possible. If smartphone companies really wanted to generate less electronic waste, they'd change release schedules and development time to force consumers to keep their damn phones for a longer period of time, plus do as much as possible to keep older units working instead of making them useless after a certain ammount of OS updates. Another way is to make the architecture more open and standardized so that electronics can be used in multiple ways - like old desktops and laptops that you can install some Linux distro and use as an HTPC or something. Of course, Apple stuff is the harderst type of hardware to do something like that.

    The only thing Apple really has on their favor is that even older laptops and desktops retain some value in the used market, and some of it's users keeps their stuff even years after they purchased it. But make no mistake. If Apple could find a way to avoid that without a huge fanbase backlash, they would.

    1. Re:Not surprising in the least... by garote · · Score: 1

      So let me get this straight ... we have tens of thousands of these devices going into the trash and it's the industry's fault, for making a shinier new phone available each year, instead of a "more responsible" five year or ten year delay?

      Not a word for the besotted user who donates their old phone to a relative, or a friend, or sells it, or just plain gives it away, in order to get the shinier one with the force-touch or the better battery or the slightly different size?

      Smartphones are hot stuff right now. The pace of innovation in them is astonishing. The ones that sell today, the new flagship ones, they're shot through-and-through with technology that wasn't around even five years ago. A different process for chipmaking. Different battery chemistry and manufacturing. Smaller sensors. Finer, lower-power displays with better color. Fingerprint scanners. Hardware-level encryption. New antenna designs. Blah blah blah. You would prefer that this progress be artificially slowed, to make them less compelling to customers?

      Do you work for Microsoft? :D

    2. Re:Not surprising in the least... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for they run a program for upgrades that force you to trade in your phone. Which they then "recycle"...

      So you can't give it to a relative.

    3. Re:Not surprising in the least... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for they run a program for upgrades that force you to trade in your phone. Which they then "recycle"...

      So you can't give it to a relative.

      Oh noe! I'm forced to accept $50 from Apple, at gunpoint!

      I soooo wish I could give it to my uncle, it's not that I don't want to make a $50 gift. Really.

    4. Re:Not surprising in the least... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up!!

    5. Re:Not surprising in the least... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Costumers? What, they're only there on Halloween?

    6. Re:Not surprising in the least... by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Have you tried... not upgrading your phone?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  47. Funny and delusional by lapm · · Score: 1

    Environmentally friendly? When it actively makes it difficult to have devices fixed. When it actively drives effort to ban right to repair...

    1. Re:Funny and delusional by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To think that most Apple users are also claiming climate change is real and CO2 emission should be reduced. What hypocrites.

  48. So Apple is more maintenance hostile. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Not only do they want to make parts that much harder to work with, they also want to make sure that the parts remain out of reach.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  49. Functional 2nd hand devices resold for reuse by spinitch · · Score: 2

    Apple has a recycling and reuse link on their website. Some countries directed to Brightstar who runs some programs. Functional working devices get a higher price at appropriate market rates. Compare to Gazelle or others. The working devices are typically resold for customer reuse in as is condition. Apple also refurbs and resells products e.g. Certified pre-owned(CPO). Scrap from damaged non functioning devices appears to be the scope of not reusing. Guessing Apple wants to ensure no bad parts circulating from unauthorized repair dealers. Since it is tough to judge quality beyond the casing of conditions of used parts Apple to be safe does not want other electronics circulating and risking a customer incident which while not condoned by Apple , still they want to demonstrate took extra care to deter potential danger. Perhaps an overly cautious legal stance or PR since potentially some components could be reused safely but swept up in a cost benefit decision. Apple also wants accountability that recycling done vs burying especially in a developing country counter to Basel convention disposal of e waste. Slashdot should direct the article to the waste land since misleading .

    1. Re:Functional 2nd hand devices resold for reuse by garote · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry; you're just taking this news too reasonably. Get with the program here: Apple is sending hired goons to our houses to literally grab our old phones out of our hands and grind them into a fine spicy powder, forcing us to go out and buy them again. Their 100% recyclable materials and 100% renewable energy stance is mere posturing and they are no better than Halliburton, Shell Oil, and Blackwater. Boo, hiss, et cetera.

    2. Re:Functional 2nd hand devices resold for reuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're being to easy on them. As has been mentioned in other places. Yes, Apple will sell "refurbed" devices, but only if they're 100% functional. But they also actively spend money to fight "right to repair" legislation and make devices purposely as difficult to repair as possible. You can go ahead and say "but they have this token effort for reuse" to make you feel good about them, but it doesn't change the fact that they actually spend millions of dollars lobbying and design their products in such a way to stop the reuse market.

  50. It's bad when... by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 1

    ...an iPhone has to be recycled about 10-20 times before its materials cost savings will ever catchup to itself to be a problem for Apple. That's all this is. They don't want people hanging onto products that they know will still work in 5+years. I got a 32-bit MacBook that's 9 years old (4 GB of RAM) and an Acer Aspire One ZG5 (7 years I think with 1 GB of RAM) running Linux kernel 4.10 (after Upgrade script) just fine with a distro I made. https://theouterlinux.com/psyc.... I also have an iPod Touch I've literally never turned off in probably 4 years running iOS 6 with the screen on for at least three constant years 24/7 as a security cam of sorts via time lapse photography (saves storage that way). No glitches at all. So, don't give me that millennial, blindly over-capitalistic, bs excuse for needing new Apple products every year. If you take good care of your stuff, it will last. This is why cloud computing is being pushed so hard now. It's easier than zeitgeisting a new architecture to get people to buy new hardware like they did about ten years ago. Cloud computing takes your control of the OS and software away, to which the irony is that most cloud computing is open source. Only gamers, graphic designers, and hackers benefit from 64-bit because of the GPU.

    1. Re:It's bad when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did move to 64bit after somehow finding a way to upgrade to 8GB ddr2.
      Actually, linux 32bit ran and used the full 8GB. 32bit x86 has supported up to 64GB for a while, like some of those older computers with a Z80 and hundreds of K.
      But yes I could have done without the RAM upgrade. The ONLY reason currently is to leave a couple browsers open for days and weeks full of tabs so I can keep some content around without reloading it from the internet. It always sort of manage to leave a chunk of RAM free, use a chunk of swap and have another chunk of disk cache.

    2. Re:It's bad when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Generally, when a system is limited to 3GB-3.5GB or so of RAM, it is because the PCI bus is 32-bit. Pre-x64 Intel processors had support for larger physical address space (PAE?) for quite some time (processes are still limited to 4GB of address space), but that doesn't matter if those extra address lines don't go out into the rest of the system.

      And then there are 4GB/8GB/16GB RAM limitations due to what the chipset and BIOS can support.

  51. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Windows 7, released 2009...
    Here's some guy running Win7 on a P3 450. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIWy-RnCNlI
    Here's one with Win7 on a Pentium 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g84Jq1HRMbY
    Let's take it a step further. Pentium 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGXERfhe-Oo

    Pentium 1 started in 1993, P2 came out 1998 and P3 a couple years later.

    Windows XP, released 2001...
    Here's some guy running it on a 486: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDmXBKZXqf0
    486s were released 1989.

    So you could say Windows worked on decade old hardware - all without any modifications to the OS installer - since 2001.

    Your definition of "recently" is a decade and a half ago?

    Sure, you probably wouldn't WANT to, but that's not what you said.

  52. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by GNious · · Score: 1

    Core Duo 1.66mhz Mac Mini.

    Damn, that's slow!

  53. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you just compare a desktop OS that costs $2000-4000 or more with a laptop costing $200 or phone costing $600?

  54. How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can Apple influence recyclers? They generally operate under contract from municipalities. The original seller of the recycled goods is not usually a party.

  55. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uhm, Apple has been shipping commodity x86 hardware for over ten years now.

  56. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

    It's not as bad as you would think. She has other computers she uses - a netbook, a 13 inch laptop and a 17 inch laptop, but the Mac Mini isn't bad for running Office 2010 or Chrome as long as an Adblock is installed.

  57. Apple don't care about the environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they would ideally like you to use your Apple product for 1 year, and then sell it as scrap material, instead of fixing and wringing out as many years as possible. But of course by trying to recycle that shredded Macbook that could be made fully functional by just replacing some small $1 component, they make it sound like they're into recycling and environmentalism.

  58. Not too bad, all things considered. by rainer_d · · Score: 1

    I remember buying wireless cards from a seller on ebay (10-15 years ago). Those were Netgear cards (PCMCIA mostly) and they would work most of the time but fail regularly (the longer the more often...).

    Turns out that the guy had sources in Asia who literally pulled these out of trash-bins at some recycler.

    Netgear refused to honor any kind of warranty or responsibility for those cards.

    I believe, the best way to reduce waste is to carefully consider if you actually need the product in question - and start from the assumption that you don't.

    --
    Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
  59. so you are telling me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that the people that always brag about "muh planet muh planet", al gore, apple, etc, are always the guys that contaminate the most while proposing stuff for average joe but not for themselves?

    what an amazing piece mang, i totally wasnt expecting that

  60. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I installed Windows 10, Kodi and NextPVR on a 2006 Acer Aspire Idea 500 that came with a 32bit 1.83Ghz Intel Core Duo, not long ago.

    Runs perfectly well - boots up in about 30-45 seconds from the HDD. No problems with multiple tabs in Edge, even handles the video decoding for live TV from the built-in tuner (with the drivers installed automatically).

    Meanwhile my sister's struggling to open Finder on her 2015 MacBook Air (4GB RAM) because she has two windows open in Chrome and a dozen PDFs in preview.

  61. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you just compare a desktop OS that costs $2000-4000 or more with a laptop costing $200 or phone costing $600?

    A desktop OS that costs $2000-4000? What fucking planet are you on?
    The OS is free of course, and runs on Mac Minis, that start at $500; MacBooks, which start at $1000; iMacs, starting at $1100; and the Mac Pro.
    Kellyann, you already have zero credibility. When you can't even get basic facts like this right, you start to dip into negative cred territory.

  62. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "I've got a 2008 MB Air that is running the latest Mac OS X. I've got four Mac Minis. Only the oldest â" the first Intel-based Mini, circa 2006 or 2007 â" won't update past OS X 10.10 IIRC"

    You don't remember correctly:

    https://www.google.co.uk/search?safe=off&ei=qNP5WI6LIcnDwAK406bwCg&q=yosemite+hardware+requirements&oq=yosemite+hardware+&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.1.1.0l2j0i22i30k1l3.2479.9040.0.10003.28.24.1.7.7.0.200.2816.2j19j1.22.0....0...1.1j4.64.mobile-gws-serp..8.20.1764.3..0i10i67k1j0i10k1j35i39k1j0i67k1j0i131k1.LK1MPDF2HeI

    Your 2006-2007 Mac Mini won't run 2014's 10.10, you need a mid-2009 for that. To run the 2016 release, 10.12 you'd need a mid-2010 or later (indicating that your 3 other Mac Minis have been purchased since 2010).

    Why lie? It's easy to catch you out, then you just end up looking silly.

  63. The summary mentions hard drives at the bottom by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

    The summary says this specifically with respect to hard drives, which actually makes some sense, especially in the age of SSDs.

    I don't know how many articles I've read here on the subject of recycling computers and the number of commenters who have said the only way to do it is to take the platters out and drive a nail through them and such.

    Would you not expect Apple to do the same?

    SSDs are even trickier because you can't do something like the secure wipe procedures where you overwrite with 1s and then 0s repeatedly. When SSDs exhaust their write cycles they mark the particular segment as no longer usable and leave them as they are. However, the data stays, so if you can bypass the drive controller I presume you could still read the data.

    1. Re:The summary mentions hard drives at the bottom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know how many articles I've read here on the subject of recycling computers and the number of commenters who have said the only way to do it is to take the platters out and drive a nail through them and such.

      I turn my old hard drives into slag with thermite. Doesn't everybody?

  64. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by jeremyp · · Score: 2

    What part of "Running the latest version of macOS very well thanks" did you not understand?

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  65. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by jeremyp · · Score: 1

    I think woosh is appropriate here. Technically, what you wrote was 1.66 milli hertz. Even if we assume you meant megahertz, it's still only on a par with 1980's vintage 8bit machines.

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  66. Re:Yes, because Apple buyers aren't paranoid idiot by jeremyp · · Score: 1

    The last three of my MBPs are all still in use with other members of my extended family. The oldest is now over six years old but, apart from the mechanical hard disk, is still reasonably performant. It plays Minecraft just fine.

    I'm on my third iPad. Both of the previous two are in use by my parents.

    People seem much happier to accept hand-me-down Apple gear than PCs. That's probably a function of price of new Macs and perceived desirability. Making a computer attractive for second hand buyers is probably the best thing you can do in terms of recycling.

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  67. Doctorine of first sale by os2fan · · Score: 1

    I wonder what role the doctorine of first sale applies. That is, does apple's rules apply to what happens to the bits and pieces after sale?

    --
    OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    1. Re:Doctorine of first sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure what your angle is here. This is about the bits and pieces that have already been given to Apple. They contract out the crushing, and I'm sure that either they retain ownership of the parts until crushing is complete, or the crushers are contracted to not sell un-crushed pieces. The FSD wouldn't apply because it's not a first sale, it's not a consumer sale, and there would be a specific contract involved.

  68. Cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember when cash for clunkers hit locally. Lots of great older cars were crushed. Parts and all.
    In the case of electronics, capacitors alone are reason enough not to trust them for too long.
    Side note, 2010 Mac mini as main computer(bought used in 2012), and just killed my (second hand)iPhone 4s so bought an SE. All apple users aren't rich. We also have in the household an iPad mini4 and an Apple TV.

  69. I CANT BELIVE THIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NOOOOOOO WHHYYYYYYYY I can't believe that apple has BETRAYYYYED MEEEEEEEEEEE :(

    crutchy conway;)

  70. Apple Certified Repair tech says Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Posting anon as I'm a certified Apple repair technician. But I hate them. So much.

    The design choices they continue to make with each generation are getting progressively more anti-consumer for no good reason. Glued-in batteries. Keyboards that are part of the chassis and require full disassembly of the entire laptop plus $150 for the part. When keyboards and batteries are some of the most commonly-replaced items in the laptop. Soldered in memory, which is unnecessary... no Apple laptop is thinner than a SODIMM.

    And what the fuck is with their proprietary SSD modules? Everyone else is using standard M.2 NVMe. But Apple? Nope... they have their own version which not only has a LARGER connector, but is proprietary and incompatible. Doesn't perform any better, but they can charge to 5-10 times more for it.

    Make no mistake about it: these are 100% without question decisions made to ensure early obsolescence and prevent users from making decisions that are financially in the user's best interest. Instead, Apple gets more money out of their mindless cult zealots who would rather be raped for the sake of owning a fashion statement versus a quality tool.

    1. Re:Apple Certified Repair tech says Apple sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why I'm holding on to 2010-2012 era MacBook Pros and Mac Minis as long as I can. (I still haven't yet found used Mac Pros from that era, and I'm not sure I care anymore. If I need card slots, I can run Linux on a regular PC.) Maybe Apple will suddenly return to sanity. After all, the early '90s were another period when Apple made really bad hardware. (Have you ever tried to upgrade the ram in an 8100?) I weathered those years with a closeout deal PowerTower Pro.

  71. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    Recycling and reuse are completely different things. Macs have great resale value, compared to other hardware in the same categories.

  72. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    Windows 7 was released a month after 10.6. It's not terribly surprising that it would run well enough on that hardware.

  73. Freedom of Information request? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to blow right past the story, and simply ask, when did Freedom of Information requests become a thing for any non-government entity or individual?
    Did I miss the memo?

  74. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Old computers simply can't run the latest versions of macOS yet the ecosystem pretty much requires it.

    I'm typing this on a 27" mid-2010 iMac, running macOS Sierra (10.12.4). The only feature that comes to mind that I cannot use on this computer is Airdrop, which requires a newer bluetooth chipset than this system has.

    I also have a 4th generation iPad, which dates to 2012, so that's about 4.5 years old, and it's running iOS 10.3.1 quite happily, and it's still running with the original battery.

    The iMac isn't a terribly fast system - mostly because of the big, slow spinning disk, and the iPad isn't supremely fast, but perfectly fast enough for reading, web browsing, email, watching movies, etc. Given that this is a 7 year old computer and a 4.5 year old iPad, your claim that "old [Apple] computers simply can't run the latest versions" of their OS is pretty laughable.

  75. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Starting at" can be translated: the absolute base models, with not enough soldered-i memory to be useful. To get the useful Mac you need to expect to pay about four times the going market price for the memory upgrade.

    The slimy marketing fucks have been driven out of the commodified market for windowa/linux hardware. They are thriving in the Apple store, however.

    You love paying full retail?!? Buy a Mac!!

  76. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FreeBSD is a mostly x86 only variant of BSD. That's the shortcut they took to compete with linux. A more robust choice for PPC or any other arch would be NetBSD or maybe OpenBSD.

  77. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

    I didn't think about it that way. But the difference is that Microsoft is still supporting Windows 7 with security patches and most new software is still supported for Windows 7. Very little software still supports 10.6.

    10.6 was the last 32 bit capable OS that Apple shipped.

  78. Re:Yes, because Apple buyers aren't paranoid idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly so. I just sold a (working) 2010 MBP to Mac of All Trades last week. There's a great market out there for working, pre-owned Macs. Recycling is for computers that aren't working anymore, or that are too old to be usable.

  79. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    I installed Windows 10, Kodi and NextPVR on a 2006 Acer Aspire Idea 500 that came with a 32bit 1.83Ghz Intel Core Duo, not long ago.

    Runs perfectly well - boots up in about 30-45 seconds from the HDD. No problems with multiple tabs in Edge, even handles the video decoding for live TV from the built-in tuner (with the drivers installed automatically).

    Meanwhile my sister's struggling to open Finder on her 2015 MacBook Air (4GB RAM) because she has two windows open in Chrome and a dozen PDFs in preview.

    Chrome is well-known to be the hog-of-all-resources.

    I have 4 GB of RAM in the 2012 MacBook Pro, and, using Safari, I could have more than that open without any performance issues.

  80. Re:Yes, because Apple buyers aren't paranoid idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So your argument that because one part (the flash memory/hard drive) MIGHT contain sensitive information, you shred the whole thing?

    My cable company, as shady as they are specifically mentions they refurbish or recycle old cable boxes: http://www.rogers.com/web/support/tv/recycle/375?setLanguage=en . They typically require users to return their boxes when upgrading to new ones. Remember, cable boxes these days can contain sensitive information (recorded programs like pornography and / or anything coming through the A/V jack and a unique serial number that can be traced back to you).

    Companies like the one I just mentioned ACTUALLY refurbish or "re-part" AND recycle and this company is like 100s of times smaller than APL making 100 times less money. Yet, they either do this because you fuck up the environment the least in the long run. There's quite literally no reason to FORCE recyclers to shred everything...

    Now you're sound like the crazy conspiracy theorist crackpot... =P

  81. /r/LateStageCapitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow...so Apple's "environmentalism" is really all about profit, and screw the poor folks looking for older computers.

    I can not think of a more evil plan than preventing old products from being reused.

  82. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, well, sorry, I misremembered. And go fuck yourself if you've never made a mistake. A lie would be deliberate. Something you, Kellyann, should know all about.

  83. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Starting at" can be translated: the absolute base models, with not enough soldered-i memory to be useful. To get the useful Mac you need to expect to pay about four times the going market price for the memory upgrade.

    The slimy marketing fucks have been driven out of the commodified market for windowa/linux hardware. They are thriving in the Apple store, however.

    You love paying full retail?!? Buy a Mac!!

    Again with the lies Kellyann. The Mac Minis and the iMacs don't have any soldered in memory. And Apple's prices for memory are competitive with, e.g. Dell's when buying a new PC. Not, as per your Alternative Facts, 4x market prices.
    Somehow you're trying to claim that your $200 non-Mac laptop isn't some base model, loss leader piece of crap? You sure don't get a Lenovo X1 Carbon for $200.
    No, you're not carrying a cross. Nope. Not at all. And you called me a liar for misremembering whether I could could upgrade my 2008 Mac Mini beyond 10.8 or 10.9 or 10.10. Right. Get your red white and blue dress on and go fuck yourself.

  84. Hell will freeze over 1,000 years before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple tells the truth let alone does the right thing. I think we all saw this article coming at least a decade ago.

  85. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Kielistic · · Score: 1

    Why does anyone need to tell her anything? Sounds like she knows. Which is why she switched to Windows and away from the MacOS ecosystem...

  86. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by J.+T.+MacLeod · · Score: 1

    I know that the *stated* minimum specs aren't always the *actual* minimum specs, but the ones on the box are the only ones you are going to get official support for.

  87. Re:Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win/ by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

    Huh?

    Someone made a point that Apple's hardware was designed to become obsolete faster than necessary and that you could install Windows 7 or Linux on old PC hardware. The point is, you can also install Windows 7 or Linux on old Macintosh hardware.

  88. Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Thanks, I may give that a try and hopefully have more luck with the bootloader on those.

  89. Re: It's all about preventing repair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a Mac or an iPhone doesn't work then it's not worth anything, is it? Unless you repair it. And to do that you need parts. Apple doesn't sell parts which means you can't repair a broken Macbook - unless you get the parts you need from some other broken Macbook which has something else wrong with it. Don't pretend this isn't about preventing people from repairing their devices.

  90. be real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    most of what makes up the physical mass of an apple product is the aluminum case, the glass screen, and the battery. Glass and aluminum are easily recovered. The battery not so much, but it's probably past usable by the time it makes the scrap heap. The circuitry isn't a large part of the physical mass. It's best use is in donor boards for repair, but lets not pretend that it's a huge environmental crime to shread it and recover the metal. The only real waste is in the plastics of ic packaging, flex cables, ports (good thing they are getting rid of them).

  91. The Obama Doctrine by I75BJC · · Score: 1

    POTUS Obama use this same strategy/tactic with the ailing USA automobile industry. Huge rebates for buying a New USA-Manufacturer's cars if you destroyed particular, older, gas-guzzling cars. Big boon to the failing USA car manufacturers and an attempt to keep the Government Motors'GM brand alive. It succeeded in selling a lot of Ford cars and damaged the user car industry for years with the added benefit that poor people (and others who purchased used cars) didn't have good, reliable, used cars to purchase. I shuddered to see a Federal Government destroying the engine in and older, but fully functional, Volvo saloon. Terribly wasteful and pitiful. Recycle the damn things and put them in the hands of people who need them. In this country and in other countries, these older. "retired" products can still be used and offer life. Damned Obama policy!

  92. Newsflash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple can't make anyone do anything, not even buy their crappy over priced, over hyped products.

    In other news: People still by them.

  93. Typing on a 5 year-old Macbook.. by LesserWeevil · · Score: 1

    ..that I rescued from a college student fanboi who 'needed a newer one', I have to say Apple is the defining brand of the wannabe class. They make nice industrial designs with simplicity engineered in - then do everything possible to limit the useful life of those devices by generating fanboi demand (remember Johnny Ive waxing poetic on the iPhone 5 screen size?) and questionable new features to lure existing customers to trash absolutely usable devices to get the new 'must-have' ones. Technology as a fashion accessory, as preached by Apple, is probably responsible for millions of tons of e-waste.

  94. Get a Fairphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want a phone that runs. Modern phone OS and is made with the same standards as an iPhone AND is highly repairable, get a Fairphone.