I’m going to side with Apple on this one for a couple of reasons.
- They have gone out of their way to inform me, as a customer, about battery recycling, to include prepaid mailers with battery replacements, and have minimal packaging.
- Apple has a strong track record in their manufacturing process for eliminating particularly harmful chemicals.
- I admire the fact that they pretty much told Greenpeace to fuck off when Greenpeace tried to bully them.
- Many of the environmental issues that Greenpeace is complaining about are related to the manufacturing process for circuit boards, and that is an industry issue and not a vendor issue so it’s more than unfair to give the Greenpeace ass-kissers at Dell high marks and Apple poor marks when they are subject to the same realities.
- Lastly, Greenpeace doesn’t display much intellectual honesty in when they admit the judging criteria are "subjective". This is another thinly disguised attempt by an activist organization to shakedown a large company
Kruszewska said the study intentionally ignored companies’ absolute size to concentrate on their relative performance. She conceded the choices of manufacturers and judging criteria were subjective. But Greenpeace tried to be "fair and transparent" in giving advance warning to the companies on the way they would be rated.
She said Greenpeace’s relationship with Apple has deteriorated since it set up a spoof web site devoted to criticizing Apple’s environmental policies, she added.
"Once we launched the ‘Green my Apple’ Web site, we stopped hearing from Apple altogether," she said.