An important part of that Press Release is this quote:
"The MacBook Air has less PVC and BFRs than other Mac computers, but it is not entirely free from those hazardous chemicals. Had it been it would have made Apple an ecological leader."

So, they're not actually "pleased" with the MB Air. They're just pleased they got a chance to get more PR time.

Greenpeace will never be happy. They make such a stink about the way things are without offering a solution to the problem. Where's their guide to making a computer entirely free from those hazardous chemicals? Is it even possible? A lot of those chemicals are used to prevent fires.. the kind that have happened to certain laptop batteries...

Has any OTHER company even TRIED to get their computers as ecologically friendly as much as Apple? Does Greenpeace even use computers? And if they did, aren't they partly responsible for destroying the very environment they're trying to save? I'm just saying, ya know? I think Greenpeace is just another way of saying "Environmental Nazi" I think they should be happy that the MacBook Air is so successful by eliminating most of the hazardous materials you see in oh, so many other PCs on the market today. Is there a computer entirely free of these chemicals anyway? I'd research it myself, but I'm too busy destroying the environment to care.

The Greenpeace "green" computer:

Nobody cares what greenpeace thinks, because they DON'T think. They aren't capable of a rational thought and if they did have one they couldn't express it. If it was possible to smoke a whale and get high, the Japanese would be protesting greenpeace for killing too many whales.

How can that be green? It is clearly made from wood, someone raped a rainforest to make that.

Quote

Intruder wrote:
The Greenpeace "green" computer:

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
How can that be green? It is clearly made from wood, someone raped a rainforest to make that.

If there's any dead simple way of starting the ranters flaming away, it's mentioning the name of Greenpeace. Light touch paper and stand well clear. The same old bollocks are trotted out each time, without any light being put on the issue.


Find something else to get upset about!

There is being green and then there is stopping the bad press from Greenpeace. At the end of the day, Apple (and many other tech companies such as Brother and Dell) are doing really well on the environmental front.

One of the most impressive things to me is that such subjects are making it into keynotes and product announcements. Using this new "Greener Apple" approach in marketing is a great thing all round and should really help enlighten people as to the progress made as well as the issues at hand. Most people simply don't know about most of the things Greenpeace bangs on about without the help of a group worth listening to, such as the people making and selling the machine.

I personally do not see why people are getting upset at Greenpeace. It's tactics are clearly working, and it is completely up front about its objectives and methodology for achieving these objectives. Fact is, ever since it started harping on Apple, Apple has been more open about it's environmental practices.

Moreover, as an Apple customer and stockholder, I certainly do not feel bad for Apple. It claims to be an innovator, the holder of the Noble Peace Prize for his environmental activism sits on its board, and Apple has historically been quiet about it's green efforts. It certainly is the perfect target for such efforts, as Greenpeace is guaranteed publicity for its cause. Smart if you ask me.

Finally, in todays world when politicians are paid off by lobbyists and the media is owned by corporations, you have to resort to gorilla marketing tactics to get your message heard. Just because you don't like the tactics, doesn't make the underlying message any less valid.

Your point really isn't valid. I would love to buy computers made in America because I think we should keep our money in our Country and not support countrys that treat people like machines. However, that simply is not possible because every computer is made outside the US. As such, if I want to be productive in today's world, I have to buy a computer made outside the COuntry even though this pains me.

The same thing applies to Greenpeace: just because it uses computers doesn't mean it has to be happy with the computers it is using. Last I checked, speaking up is the very essence of the American spirit.

Moreover, Greenpeace isn't asking computer manufacturers to do anything other then 1) improve their recycling efforts, 2) be more open about their environmental efforts, and 3) publicly commit to trying to remove certain hazardous chemicals from their products.

I really do not see the problem with that. Out of all the computer manufacturers out there, Apple was the only on up until recently refusing to do any of these things.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Has any OTHER company even TRIED to get their computers as ecologically friendly as much as Apple? Does Greenpeace even use computers? And if they did, aren't they partly responsible for destroying the very environment they're trying to save? I'm just saying, ya know? I think Greenpeace is just another way of saying "Environmental Nazi" I think they should be happy that the MacBook Air is so successful by eliminating most of the hazardous materials you see in oh, so many other PCs on the market today. Is there a computer entirely free of these chemicals anyway? I'd research it myself, but I'm too busy destroying the environment to care.

Other industries use enormously more of these chemicals. For example the building industry. And the flame retardants demonstrably prevent thousands of fires (and consequent environmental damage, deaths and injuries) which far outweigh the damage caused by the minute amounts Greenpeace likes to publicise in computers.

This is fundraising, not environmental activism.

Quote

Terrin wrote:


Finally, in todays world when politicians are paid off by lobbyists and the media is owned by corporations, you have to resort to gorilla marketing tactics to get your message heard. Just because you don't like the tactics, doesn't make the underlying message any less valid.

I find all of the ratings by Greenpeace about the computer industry to lack technical comprehensiveness and perspectve of the environmental impact of all industry as a whole.

The tactic of regularly broadcasting the impression that Apple is a major polluter is tiring as it has always been an obvious publicity stunt. While I have been a supporter of environmental causes for decades, I consider these efforts by Greenpeace at best an annoying distraction and at worst harming the environmental movement.

imho at least, BB