[Macworld]

Post your comments for Latest Greenpeace rankings still put Apple down here

[Schneb]

Anyone notice that Red Apples are sweet and Green Apples are sour?

[bousozoku]

They won't be happy until Apple use tree limbs, leafs, and acorns for their products.
Personally, I'd like to know what kind of computers Greenpeace use that are so environmentally friendly.

[MorrisTheCat]

Just more reasons why we shouldn't be listening to anything GreenPeace says. If anything, Apple has made great strides in reducing toxic materials in their latest hardware, making the bodies out of completely recyclable aluminum, lower power LED displays and a ton of other things. BUT, apparently, none of this matters in GreenPeace's typically warped logic. I get the impression they just spin a dial and whatever company it lands on they will bash in their report, but with prejudice to those companies that are doing well in this economic climate.
I'm seriously all for greener equipment and for saving the environment, but GreenPeace are really a bunch of loons that seem to have no rhyme or reason to anything they spew.
If we ignore them long enough, will they just go away, and let other companies that are more serious about this stuff come to the front?

[dietero]

In view of the the methods Greenpeace has used in the past I don't think they have much credibility, at least as far as I'm concerned.
In view of that I think that they should hang their "green" ratings in their green ears.

[Steve_S]

GreenPeace is largely irrelevant and it would be best if the media simply ignored them. While the original intention of the GreenPeace organization may have been noble, they essentially have become a nuisance organization that simply makes media hype on a regular basis in order to maintain corporate sponsorship.
The fact that their rating system weighs more heavily on what companies publicly claim to do some time in the future as opposed to what they are doing today speaks volumes.

[nonstopdesign]

who cares

[natmusak]

Greenpeace has very much become the PETA of environmental activist groups (or maybe it's the other way around).

[Kyle_Varnell]

Personally, I'd like to know what kind of computers Greenpeace use that are so environmentally friendly.
Unless they're shouting any method they use be it computer or even pencil & paper is, using their daffy-nition, an "Environmental No-No"
Greenpeace grows more and more irrelevant with each passing day.

[nyip11]

It's really too bad. Greenpeace used to be an org. with meaning and relevance. Now it's just ranting and raving - just one step away from being a raving lunatic.

[inpersonoz]

I work for an environmental org, and find Greenpeace's ranking system hard to fathom. Using my MacBook Pro to telecommute is a lot greener than driving to work everyday, and the long lifecycle of the Mac's we use can't be ignored as a 'green' factor too.

[Xaqtly]

As an example, look at Nintendo. All the way in the red! You know why? Because Greenpeace doesn't have the information they want to rate them accurately. So in the absence of information, they rank a ZERO.
Apple isn't ranked that low because they're environmentally unfriendly. They're ranked that low because Greenpeace doesn't have all of Apple's environmental information, and are ranking zeroes for any categories they can't fill in with real data.
And of course because they're on a witch hunt.

[Billion003]

I don't care what Greenpeace thinks.

[Joe_Mac_User]

It's all hype. Gleanpiece didn't even mention Apple until Apple became big, profitable, and popular. They're just trying to use Apple's coattails to hype their organization. Like others have said, it's a shame this organization has become a big waste of time.
Huh. They're a big waste. Maybe someone should report them.