OK... I am generally not the person to come to Apple's defense but I don't think everyone should jumping to these conclusion. That Barbara Kyle lady from the Electronics Take Back Coalition says <i>"We seriously doubt that these MacBooks should qualify for EPEAT at any level because we think they flunk two required criteria in the 'Design for End of Life' section of the standard."</i> They <i>think</i> it flunks. Has that been shown?<p>The article goes on to say <i>Those criteria are "4.3.1.3 Easy disassembly of external enclosure," and "4.3.1.5 Identification and removal of components containing hazardous materials." Kyle noted that the glue makes the battery difficult to remove "safely," which is "exactly the kind of design that this standard seeks to discourage."</i><p>So, has it yet been shown that Kyle is right about the glue? Maybe the glue is easier to get off than she thinks? Maybe Apple truly does believe their glue allows for "easy disassembly".
Just in case you aren't aware, all companies award themselves an EPEAT grade. Once they award the grade, it is then reviewed and the grade can be lowered if they don't live up to the standard.<p>I only bring this up because you would be mislead if you think that Apple broke any rules on this one. They followed the book...<p>The problem however is that they <i>grossly</i> overestimate their qualification for EPEAT gold rating. EPEAT must review and reduce this self-awarded and clearly inflated rating if they want to keep any credibility for this standard...<p>Disclaimer: I love seeing things go bad for Apple... But, they haven't strictly broken any rules.. They've just been ridiculous trying to award themselves EPEAT gold.
At the end of the article it mentions that Apple recently stated that in the near future they will be "working with EPEAT as their rating system and the underlying IEEE 1680.1 standard evolve."<p>Translation: Whatever exists in the EPEAT guidelines that would prevent the retina MBP's from receiving GOLD certification is about to be tossed in the rubbish bin.
What a joke. If EPEAT doesn't overturn this rating, all credibility should be out the window. It seems like Apple is trying to strong-arm them into changing the requirements so the laptop complies.<p>> Apple declined to comment specifically on how it believes the Retina MacBook Pro meets the EPEAT criteria, but referred us to SVP Mansfield's letter from Friday, which noted that the company in looking forward to "working with EPEAT as their rating system and the underlying IEEE 1680.1 standard evolve."
From PR disaster to PR disaster. Good job, Apple. Did you really think that no one will dispute this and make a big deal about it online? In today's highly-connected and online world, honesty pays. Because if there's anything wrong or dishonest, <i>someone</i>, <i>somewhere</i>, will find out about it, and then let the whole world know.