Comments on: Dell Green, All Right–Green With Envy

By: Mathue Taxion

Mathue Taxion — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:53:51 +0000

Considering how huge Dell is compared to Apple Computer they should be FAR, FAR in the lead. Dell turns over new designs many times faster and thus SHOULD be capable of moving old manufacturing technology out faster than Apple. Looking at the ad on youtube I don’t find the ad all that bad really, certainly it’s far better truth wise compared to a LOT of other consumer products (just watch the weight loss pill ads!) Casting an eye at Dell with their plastic enclosures which require a great deal more prep to recycle than aluminum. Browsing a parts list at the sheer number of different plastic materials in a typical lappy of theirs I find their ‘calling out of Apple’ to be at the very least, disingenuous.

By: Neil Anderson

Neil Anderson — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 03:49:55 +0000

“And what happens to all the aluminum that’s removed during the process?”

It’s made into another aluminum block.

By: Phil Baker

Phil Baker — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 01:19:36 +0000

I’d love to see a comparison of the energy it takes to machine out the MacBook casing from a solid chunk of aluminum with forming the parts directly. And what happens to all the aluminum that’s removed during the process?

By: Dominic Pannone

Dominic Pannone — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:48:26 +0000

I find it unfortunate that Dell could not be more specific on the Direct2Dell post. I was encouraged when I came across it because the Apple commercial is about the clearest example of Greenwashing you will find. Simply put, it is a adv Apple never should have made, but Dell did a poor job explaining why. I Tweeted about it lamenting that the media’s Apple bias would probably ignore the post and the Apply fanboys would smell blood and blindly attack regardless of validitiy. Thanks for at least putting this issue out into the social conversation.

By: Will Todd

Will Todd — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 17:02:45 +0000

The fact is that Apple is the greenest computer company right now. . .green as in $25 billion in the bank. The #14 Greenpeace ranking isn’t mentioned because unlike Dell, Apple isn’t claiming to be one of the greenest companies. Instead, it is claiming a very green product, a claim which Dell does not refute with any evidence, other than to say that, overall, it is a greener company (and as said before, this would be true environmentally, not financially).

Instead of random posts on blogs, how about Dell employees like “Sean” focus on developing products customers actually want to buy, and not on what Apple is doing. We all know the company isn’t capable of developing such products, but at least if they give it a shot they can spend less time “blogging.”

By: John Paczkowski

John Paczkowski — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 17:01:28 +0000

Sean …

Apple didn’t simply post an annual memo. It’s 2008 Environmental Update includes individual Product Environmental Reports for most all its products, as well as its facilities. Pearson’s post — which I can oddly no longer access — says, specifically: “Apple hasn’t stated any goals, just made claims.” That statement is categorically false, according to the materials I was able to find — and find very easily — online. Moreover, while Dell takes issue with Apple’s “greenest laptop” claim, it offers up no evidence whatsoever to refute it. Finally, if you believe Greenpeace, Dell’s own environmental record is in decline.

Now, I’m not saying Apple couldn’t do more. We could all do more. But I don’t put any stock whatsoever in Pearson’s allegations.

By: John Paczkowski

John Paczkowski — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:52:20 +0000

Actually, I did mention Apple's Greenpeace ranking, albeit parenthetically. In retrospect, I shouldn't have bothered to mention Greenpeace at all, since the group's methodology is controversial -- especially when it comes to Apple.

By: Sean Donahue

Sean Donahue — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:47:40 +0000

Apple’s focus on reducing chemicals in its MacBook is a promising start, but I’d encourage your readers to look beyond the company’s initial memo (now more than a year and a half old). Is computer recycling really free when your customers have to pay for it? Sure, most companies let you recycle when purchasing a new computer, but why not take it one step further? Dell is still the only technology company to offer a free recycling program for consumers worldwide.

You also mention facilities, but I read Apple’s recent update as downplaying the importance of the carbon impact of facilities. Is that the right message to send when thousands of companies across the globe are powering their facilities with green energy? I’d encourage Apple to rethink its approach and commit to a carbon-neutral goal, as Bob challenges in his post.

Finally, I don’t think an annual memo or manifesto qualifies as “joining the conversation.” Why wouldn’t Apple allow users to weigh in with environmentally-responsible product ideas? Or blog about progress from time to time? Transparency and dialogue go beyond a carefully-worded memo.

Above all, it’s important to look beyond the memos and 30-second ads and understand the key differences of any green initiative — whether it be recycling, product efficiency or overall transparency. After taking this step, we should all make a point of challenging every company to keep innovating.
- SeanatDell

By: Jeff Stevens

Jeff Stevens — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:27:31 +0000

Okay, I bit! Is there a reason you failed to mentioned that Apple(14) is ranked lower than Dell(12) in the Greenpeace list?
And Dell had the same score as the prior ranking in which it fell (others rose!)?
Was it because the rankings are apple’s and oranges, pun intended, since Apple includes the ipod and the iphone.
You should have attacked the Ad as well. Which BTW reminded me of Apple attacks on the MSFT Vista Ad’s! Disclosure, I’m greener than anyone, I don’t own an ipod, iphone or MAC.

By: John Molloy

John Molloy — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:14:09 +0000

“We have repeatedly said we want to be the greenest technology company on the planet,”

Yup, that just about sums it up. Dell insist on talking about it and actually not achieving very much at all. A lot of their position with the Greenpeace chart was based on just talking up their green position with very little to back it up. Still new charts due soon – let’s see how they do.