I tried my first fake burger this week, even though I knew it wasn’t ‘real’ meat I’d give it a solid 8/10 and perhaps were the bias of me knowing it was fake factored in it may have got a 9.
If you are yet to visit the iFixit web site it's perhaps the best source of Apple product teardown and repair information on the planet.
What have fake burgers and Mac teardowns got to do with one another? Stick with me and you’ll see.
This week iFixit took apart the new MacBook Pro 16" 2019 laptop to show how easy it is to repair and replace components. It got a Repairability Score of 1 out of 10, in the summary they said;
The trackpad can still be removed and replaced with very little drama.
Minor components are modular, but the processor, RAM, and flash memory are soldered to the logic board.
Glue and/or rivets secure the keyboard, battery, speakers, and Touch Bar, making those components a tricky fix.
The Touch ID sensor is the power switch and is locked to the logic board, greatly complicating repairs.
Let me clarify before I continue with this article; I am a what is 'affectionately' known as an Apple fanboy - although let's be clear that's a pejorative term given to those who seem to think Apple can do nothing wrong. Stick an Apple logo on a turd and we'd buy it some suggest, perhaps not, but we do love Apple and I own most of the things they make.
However, there's a growing unease I have that flying less, buying an electric car or eating less red meat can’t fix and that is Apple's apparent double standard on helping to reduce waste and create a cleaner planet.
Apple will wax lyrically on about the environmental credentials when launching a new product, there are reams of information about it on the Apple website and have been for some time - Apple claims to be leading the charge. But when on the one hand they claim to be using processes to make their products as environmentally friendly as possible and on the other hand make products that people have to ditch because they are either obsolete or unrepairable then it makes the original claims feel hollow.
But am I wrong? Greenpeace said this of Apple;
"Apple retains its leadership spot for the third year in a row among platform operators. Both Apple and Google continue to lead the sector in matching their growth with an equivalent or larger supply of renewable energy, and both companies continue to use their influence to push governments as well as their utility and IT sector vendors to increase access to renewable energy for their operations."
However, this seems to point to the birth of an Apple product not the life and in fact death of an Apple product. It can be pointed out that much of an Apple computer can be recycled, but it's very hard to understand how ditching what could be a perfectly good computer was it fixable or upgradeable and buying a new one is a better option. Both the energy that is taken to recycle the old machine and used to make a new one has to create a greater energy deficit.
According to Lucy Siegle writing in the Guardian;
"Global e-waste projected to hit 50m tonnes next year (2018)."
Furthermore, Greenpeace, the company who praised Apple's green credentials on one hand also said this;
"Fairphone, Dell and HP are the only companies that make spare parts and repair manuals available to the public, while products from brands such as Apple, Samsung and Microsoft are among the least easy to repair and upgrade, according to Greenpeace’s latest IT product guide."
So even Greenpeace seems troubled by the mismatch between what Apple says and what they do.
As a team, the Experts have been discussing how we can help our readers create and maintain more environmentally friendly studios, but with so many using Apple computers, we can’t ignore the elephant in the room.
I'm trying hard to make my small difference to help save our planet by flying less, walking more, buying less, eating fake meat, see there’s the connection I promised, I bet you’ve been hanging off your proverbial seat since I mentioned them. I can't, on the one hand, bang on about these things and ignore the elephant in the room - Apple isn't helping as much as it could.It's like building an eco-house and then having a huge bonfire in the garden every day, your neighbours will just think you are a pretentious wanker who was trying to get on Grand Designs but not really serious about the eco-house.
Here’s the point - it may not be features or usability that makes me move away from Apple in the end but their continued insistence that I buy things I don't need and throw away otherwise perfectly good products. I don’t even think a video of Jony Ive talking about making the new Mac as if Apple has just cured cancer cuts it. I don’t care how much Apple wants to paint it, there’s nothing environmentally friendly about this.
I’m sure Apple PR can trot out lines about still being environmental guardians of the galaxy but I’m not buying it.
Discuss.