Apple commits to be 100% carbon neutral for supply chain and products by 2030

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/07/apple-commits-to-be-100-percent-carbon-neutral-for-its-supply-chain-and-products-by-2030/

by uptown • 6 years ago

166 137 6 years ago

apple.com

Whatarethese• 6 years ago

Good on Apple! All companies should strive for some levels of sustainability. Upfront it might cost them but it will save them money down the road.

pera2• 6 years ago

Wouldn't be awesome if large corporations competed to reach the carbon neutral mark with the same enthusiasm they had for the trillion dollar mark? :)

Every company should add a page with a live chart showing how well they are doing right now and how far away they are to be carbon neutral.

somethoughts• 6 years ago

Perhaps such a chart could be made for them on their behalf? Actually curious now if someone is already charting this.

lrem• 6 years ago

Google reached carbon neutrality in 2008 I believe. What did it get out of that? How does that motivate the others?

exabrial• 6 years ago

Doesn't matter. You know what would be awesome? Repairable and upgradable products. Being stylish and environmentally friendly aren't competing concerns unless you make them.

m0zg3• 6 years ago

Not using labor from the country which runs actual concentration camps would be pretty cool, too.

spiderfarmer• 6 years ago

Please let the downvoters explain why they think this opinion deserves downvotes. I thought this was a news and discussion platform.

blhack• 6 years ago

Apple is doing all of this to save about $100 per iPhone: https://www.vox.com/technology/2018/9/13/17851052/apple-ipho...

afandian3• 6 years ago

Nearly everything is made in a country which has concentration camps and forced labour for the export market. It's difficult to avoid. Then again, so is carbon intensive manufacture. So I think this is a natural next question. In both cases someone has to lead the way.

akerro• 6 years ago

Repairable and upgradable products.

also no child slaves in Africa to mine minerals and in China to assemble parts

pwinnski• 6 years ago

They've been working on those efforts for many years now, it's carbon neutrality that's new.

Unless you're suggesting that they can't attempt carbon neutrality until they've finished permanently eliminating the others first? It's not as if they haven't been trying for many, many years, since 2013[0] at least, and I think longer.

[0] https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-fires-supplier-after-audit-u...

nojito• 6 years ago

Repairable and upgradable products.

This is just an excuse to prop up a industry that ultimately doesn't need to exist.

We need better warranties and written long term support of tech products.

germinalphrase• 6 years ago

If the goal of repairable/upgradable products is to reduce waste/resource depletion - how do warranties/long term support achieve the same objective?

bch• 6 years ago

I wouldn’t mind having an SD slot and a 3.5mm headphone jack. The impenetrable sleekness of modern phones looks great in equally impenetrable television ads, but my real world would benefit from a bit more utility. Add replaceable battery to the list too, to swap out a dead one, or install a larger one.

ksk• 6 years ago

I fear that this will just increase the price of the products. Apple will toss the broken iphone and hand you a new one because they don't want to pay the cost of labor to fix it. Repairing reduces e-waste, competition in repair reduces prices (with obviosu caveats). You can't really get around that.

xoa• 6 years ago

This is a great comment and extremely disappointing to see down voted. It's perfectly understandable that lots of people on HN in particular, being hackers, want to be able to mess with hardware as a goal/value in and of itself. However, even here and certainly for the general population "repairability" or "modularity" are merely two possible tools of many, not goals themselves. The goal for most people, rightly, is that any given product lasts for a "reasonable lifespan" in line with its relative price and market conditions. In a world with crappy warranty coverage, a product that is easier to repair means that people who get stuck with a manufacturing/QA/shipping fuckup might not get quite as big a bill.

But they still get a bill, and often that's a flat out externality. Everyone expects (and most get) their phones say to last a good 3-6 years, with a longer time for more expensive nicer devices. What should happen is that is simply explicitly mandated and gets represented in the price. Manufacturers should be the ones responsible for figuring out the right way to make it happen at a price that will still sell. They can try a vast number of different combinations of efforts to accomplish that, and easier repairability could be one. But instead, they're allowed to hide that cost and foist the 1%/2%/whatever problems off onto consumers.

That's what the government should fix, not tell them exactly how to do so since every various way to do it involves trade offs. Repairability, modularity, and upgradeability aren't free either. They involve compromises in physical design and other aspects that many of us directly value.

mrtksn5• 6 years ago

I hate this myth. Apple products are very repairable, I got repaired my iPhone numerous times and I know many people who did the same and there's a shop in every corner who can repair iPhones. In poorer countries, Apple products are passed down/up to generations. A 10 years old iPhone would still be repairable and often would be passed to a non-techie relative.

It's a well established fact that Apple products last long, thats why the second hand market is very strong. An iPhone is almost equivalent to cash.

Kuinox7• 6 years ago

Oh, tell me how you replace a battery, step by step ?

lhopki01• 6 years ago

My wife's macbook ssd died the other day. 'Repairable' in this case meant replacing the entire motherboard for a cost of almost a new machine.

Repairable should mean just repairing what's broken not everything.

lokl• 6 years ago

If they're serious about reducing their pollution, they'll give more consideration to the end of the product life cycle.

jjcon• 6 years ago

On the other hand, if the device has no footprint then it doesn’t matter as much. If Apple wants sustainability without compromising form/function this is a great way to do it.

One can always do more - that’s an easy and always applying criticism. Let’s applaud when people do something good.

fahrradflucht• 6 years ago

But "no footprint" seams pretty far away if not impossible. They claim _carbon_ neutrality in 10 years. There will still be pollution and resource over consumption which product lifecycle extension could work to improve up on.

Wowfunhappy3• 6 years ago

On the other hand, if the device has no footprint then it doesn’t matter as much.

Agreed. The problem is, I'm sure "carbon neutral" means they're using carbon offsets to a significant degree. Offsets are good, and I certainly wouldn't want to discourage any company from using them. But, they're also not a panacea—certainly not to the point where there's zero harm in buying a new phone versus fixing an existing one.

kitotik• 6 years ago

Are there consumer tech product companies that have longer support cycles?

(Sent from my 2012 MacBook Air running latest macOS)

zepto2• 6 years ago

They already do give far more consideration to the end of the product life cycle than any competitor and they continue to improve.

snowwrestler• 6 years ago

I think they do give some consideration to that. For example you can send any Apple device back to Apple, or drop it off at one of their stores, and they will recycle it. In the U.S. at least, they will send you a prepaid shipping label to ship it.

https://www.apple.com/recycling/nationalservices/

And if that doesn't happen, and the machine ends up in a landfill, that's where their standard list of "made without arsenic, lead, etc" can help. In terms of the shell, aluminum and glass, while energy-intensive to produce, are arguably more benign substances to have in a landfill than plastic.

coold• 6 years ago

Wow, they found a new way to keep outsource in secret

giorgioz• 6 years ago

It feels like it's a too far away goal and too big goal.

2030 is the new 2020 where we push away dreams for the future, forget about them, try to do them at the last moment and miss the deadline. I think it would be better to have have smaller goals with a shorter timeframe.

zaphoyd2• 6 years ago

Apple has been making and achieving smaller goals with shorter timeframes for a decade now. They committed to and acheived carbon neutrality for their first party operations already and are now incrementally pushing that out to their supply chain and product lifecycle.

Based on past evidence this is not likely to be a set and forget arrangement for Apple.

rm999• 6 years ago

This feels different to me. Apple released a detailed, concrete ten year roadmap that other companies can follow - this already indicates serious commitment. There are enough in-flight initiatives that if carbon neutrality is deprioritized it will have to be an explicit decision from high-up in the company. Also, this is Apple we're talking about, not Google :P

mav3rick• 6 years ago

Google already beat Apple to it long time ago. So you're right this is Apple not Google.

Trufa• 6 years ago

This is such negative comment. I don't understand why this gets traction.

I'm sure pretty smart people spent a lot of time in coming up with this goal that is ambitious and pretty noble may a I say. Probably going through months of goal planning a long vision setups.

And with low effort comment you can say, meh, I think I know better without almost any contextual information about any of this.

I don't mean to be insulting, just that I think it's a little disrespectful to peoples effort. And only negative.

Maybe you can present us a semi detailed plan of how Apple can better set their carbon emission program.

ekr• 6 years ago

I don't think it's either negative or insulting. And it raises a good point. In 10 years' time lots of things could change that would make this "goal" irrelevant. Apple might be struggling to make ends meet 5 years down the line. I know that seems very unlikely for Apple right now, but imagine a company like Intel, add a big economic regression, trade wars with China (which for Apple is a big source of revenue) etc. But even just a few changes in the board of directors, or a change of CEO could see this target go out of the picture.

Besides, it's not a difficult target to achieve. I don't think it would cost much more than a few tens of millions of dollars to start and operate some solar and wind power stations of sufficient capacity to offset all of their consumption. It should be pocket change for Apple's budget.

renw0rp• 6 years ago

1. Reuse 2. Reduce 9. Recycle

They missed the first point

frankbreetz• 6 years ago

It's 1.Reduce 2.Reuse 3.Recycle

zepto2• 6 years ago

What makes you think this? Reuse is fundamental to their strategy and has been for years.

enahs-sf2• 6 years ago

While this is definitely a noble goal, I wonder what it would take for Apple to become carbon negative and what the timeframe for that would be?

torben-friis• 6 years ago

January 2, 2030. They just need to become neutral and plant an extra tree :)

bilbo0s• 6 years ago

I don't think it's possible. (Unless my understanding of the term "carbon negative" is mistaken.)

Let's suppose you could manufacture your devices with 0 carbon emissions. No solar, no wind, no gas, no nothing. Some other energy source with no carbon inputs needed. For the sticklers, let's suppose none of the human employees breath or anything during the manufacture of the products. So no carbon there either.

You still have to deliver it right?

Let's suppose you make it in Chicago, or Miami, or San Fran, wherever. How are you going to get that product to Lincoln Nebraska with no carbon emissions? How will you get it to Lyon France? Or Aguadilla PR? or Ningbo? Or Mwanza? (And in this case it would have to be more than "no" carbon emissions, it would have to be "negative" carbon emissions.)

I'm not certain any company can deliver a physical product with negative carbon emissions. It seems almost impossible without using funny math.

zaphoyd2• 6 years ago

I believe negative carbon emissions are typically done via projects like carbon capture (various methods) and regulatory credits (essentially paying other people to reduce their emissions).

enahs-sf2• 6 years ago

https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2020/01/16/microsoft-will-b...

Microsoft plans to be carbon negative by 2030. I think it's via offsets. For example, if Apple planted a tree for every iPhone sold.

This is probably much more difficult given the consumer nature of their physical products, but it's not like they're short on cash.

sailingparrot• 6 years ago

Microsoft will be carbon negative by 2030:

https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2020/01/16/microsoft-will-b...

To reach that they mention actively investing and deploying carbon removal systems.

BelleOfTheBall• 6 years ago

Maybe they'll also consider not using planned obsolescence and stop sourcing "blood gold"? There was a whole documentary on the latter but the former is the real big offender.

cjohansson• 6 years ago

I hope they focus on the human well-being aspect as well in their production and supply chain. There is no reason a Chinese worker should experience worse working-conditions than a US worker

keymone• 6 years ago

They already do. And the difference is in economic, social and political situation in US and China. Nobody should experience worse working conditions than anybody else, but short of economic embargo on China by entire world, I doubt anything can move them.

macintux• 6 years ago

They have been generating annual, detailed reports for years on the conditions at their suppliers and their programs to remediate problems.

As far as I can tell, they are going much farther towards enforcing humane treatment than anyone else in the computer business, but I’d be curious to hear who’s doing a better job.

https://www.apple.com/supplier-responsibility/

fermienrico2• 6 years ago

We need to protest Apple to make products locally in California/Texas or in EU where sustainability can be traced [1], suppliers can be held accountable and there is no kowtow to the CCP.

Sustainability is just one of the fringe benefits - labor is getting more expensive in China and Apple has risen because of cheap labor. Apple needs to bring back manufacturing to the West. It will invigorate local supply chains from screw makers to PCB manufacturers, glass cutting, CNC, etc.

It would be a dream to buy an iPhone proudly made sustainably in US+EU.

Why are we barking at NBA and flat out ignoring Apple? Where are protests outside of Apple HQ? Where is the press on this!!!?

[1] https://9to5mac.com/2020/03/02/apple-suppliers-implicated-in...

birdyrooster• 6 years ago

Why does Tim Apple get away with being so close to Donald Duck with private meetings and such to preserve Apple's business with China? I find it curious that the media hasn't bothered to take swipes at something so obviously in conflict with Apple's stated mission and ethos.

curiousllama• 6 years ago

I love the ambitious goal-setting.

One thing to notice: > they’ve helped us make our products more energy efficient and bring new sources of clean energy online around the world.

This is a play in the sustainable-tech market space. Inasmuch as _other companies_ care about sustainability, Apple is trying to publicly stay ahead so it can credibly claim expertise when other companies start paying attention.

_qulr5• 6 years ago

The battery in my 2014 MacBook Pro is going bad for the second time. Replacing the battery last time was expensive and a major ordeal. It's more difficult than replacing the battery in my car.

Replacing the battery in my 2006 MacBook Pro took all of 15 seconds.

If the lifetime of a battery powered device is expected to be much longer than the lifetime of the battery, then the battery needs to be easily user replaceable. Otherwise, the manufacturer has zero credibility on the environment.

Don't even get me started on vendor OS lockdown and its effect on the environment. They're intentionally making devices disposable.

samfisher83• 6 years ago

I mean all the phone manufacturers are doing it, but phones used to have replaceable batteries. I think companies realized they could make more by selling new phones. But the iphone has never had a replaceable battery.

quonn• 6 years ago

I never got a new phone because the battery was not good enough anymore (and it can be replaced, just not by yourself). Apple charges about $50, obviously 10x cheaper than a new phone.

Spivak• 6 years ago

Does it really matter if it’s “user serviceable” or does it just need to be “serviceable.” Because I think Apple meets that bar. I don’t really care that for all practical purposes my transmission isn’t serviceable by me personally, but that I can take it to the shop for an okay price.

Getting my iPhone battery replaced was a pretty painless experience compared to my old Nexus. Hell it was actually easier than my Samsung that had a user replaceable battery because by the time it needed replaced I couldn’t find a 1st party replacement battery!

wlesieutre3• 6 years ago

EDIT - When looking up Watch service prices I missed that there was a cheaper $80 battery replacement vs the general out of warranty service price. But that's still 47% of the current street price (S3 is $170 from Amazon, Target, or Walmart).

Similarly, AirPods are $50 each for battery replacement, another $50 for the charging case, versus a list price of $200 and having gone on sale for $150. So if your batteries are shot in both AirPods and the case it's 75% of list price, or the entire full cost of buying them on sale. And this is a device where when brand new the tiny little batteries were barely good enough.

If my car's transmission blew and it was $10,000 to get it repaired, I'd be taking it to a scrapyard instead of a mechanic. Same goes for a 2-3 year old gadget if I'm expected to spend 75% of the replacement cost to get a battery replaced. I'm just going to say "I guess it's time for an upgrade" and see if someone on CraigsList will pay me for the old one, maybe just for spare parts depending on how bad the battery is.

If Apple really wants to extend the lifetime of their devices, they need to get the price down for replacing the disposable components, or make the disposable parts user replaceable again.

I've said it before re: AirPods battery life, but this was a predictable outcome for something with a 5 hour battery: https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/28/airpods-battery-life/

harha• 6 years ago

I would define serviceable as replaceable with reasonable cost or effort, with reasonable being closer to the price of the component than the whole device.

In other words: if the part is a battery that costs around $70, I should expect a change to be around 100-150max, not 500-600, where I’d consider upgrading to the next device.

Also it would be nice if certain components would be interchangeable in the way chargers are, though I understand that there’s higher customization for things in the device and this might not be feasible.

hinkley2• 6 years ago

There are some structural limitations to doing this. Car side impact performance is substantially hampered by the very large holes we need to make the driver and passengers replaceable. Nobody wants to crawl in the top like a tank, and we compromise heavily because of this.

One solution that occurs to me is to look at what 3M has for a thermally stable version of the removable adhesives they use for those wall hooks. How many watt hours of capacity do you lose making space for 1) the adhesive, and 2) lower tolerances to account for human error in centering the new battery? I suspect this could be engineered to be less problematic. Possibly with some sort of tool for aligning the battery and dropping it in (thinking suction cups and some rails to drop it straight in).

emsy2• 6 years ago

In one of my first laptops the battery lid was the battery. But this doesn’t allow for a sleek unibody. Apple sacrifices a substantial amount of functionality for the sake „sleekness“. Another prominent example is the keyboard which they not only kept long after they knew it was bust, but the repair was also made needlessly hard because of the Macbook’s design. There are some laptops where you can replace the keyboard without opening the laptop. I don’t expect Apple to make battery lids and swappable keyboards but the current design is user hostile and environmental unfriendly.

kempbellt• 6 years ago

It's not an easy task to make an extremely efficient and sleek design, and still make it easy to disassemble/reassemble/upgrade/etc.

The strides Apple has made to make devices smaller, more efficient, and more powerful are incredible. Though they come with obvious downsides. Cramming all that tech into a small space means you don't have an easy "click to remove" battery cell any longer - or hard drive, or memory sticks, or floppy drive bay... ;)

Not to negate your point - battery lifetimes are quite poor compared to the lifetimes of all other electronics in a computer and making them easily replaceable would be ideal.

Do we want smaller, faster, more efficient computers, or do we want easily modable computers?

Obviously both would be ideal, just not sure if that's really feasible with the way the technology is progressing.

markholmes• 6 years ago

We’re talking about a difference in thickness of millimeters though. Was my 2014 Macbook Pro really that bulky? The prevailing sentiment over the last several Apple announcements seems to have been “fewer gimmicks, more power”. Maybe software engineers aren’t the target market for these computers anymore though, or perhaps my bubble is too small.

coralreef• 6 years ago

Thin and sleek are "nice to haves". Reduced environmental impact should be "musts".

rakoo• 6 years ago

Do we want smaller, faster, more efficient computers, or do we want easily modable computers?

It's not about making them moddable, it's about making them more sustainable. Of course everyone's values differ, but wanting to repair your own stuff is something that has become more than just gimmicky, and for good reason in my opinion.

TYPE_FASTER• 6 years ago

I upgraded the RAM, did two hard drive swaps, and replaced the battery in my 2009 MBP. That laptop case also had less flex to it than the 2018 MBP I'm using today. I would much rather have a thicker but upgradeable/maintainable/solid laptop than the current models.

Thermal management on the 2018 models is also not great. Ambient temps on my house didn't really impact the 2009 model, but they definitely do for the 2018 version. I think most of this comes from processor improvements over those nine years, so there's a tradeoff, but don't know for sure. Only ARM will tell.

Totally agree that the efficiency and power management on the iPhone line is amazing. They've done a lot of work there. So far, the batteries in my iPhones have lasted about as long as the rest of the device, typically four years.

The possibility of a convergent device, like an iPhone I could use with an external display and keyboard (see https://youtu.be/yBeza4UNOm8), is intriguing. I would like that. And I would be more likely to accept the compromises for that form factor, because I can get down to one computing device.

But just having a sleeker design is not enough for the tradeoffs I see with the vintage vs. modern MBP line.

ohazi• 6 years ago

It's not an easy task to make an extremely efficient and sleek design, and still make it easy to disassemble/reassemble/upgrade/etc.

If we're just talking about the battery, that's bullshit.

1) They could use Phillips or even Torx screw heads instead of Apple's Pentalobe screw head. The back already comes off relatively easily.

2) The batteries are already connectorized, but they could use a pull-tab adhesive or a thin screw plate to secure the battery instead of fucking epoxy. There's zero space for the cells to move... they're not going to slide around. The only thing the glue does is guarantee that you're going to destroy the cells when you attempt to remove them.

3) They could sell replacement cells on their website like every other manufacturer.

Socketed mobile CPUs are probably never coming back, but RAM and SSD sockets are still a trade-off for pretty much every other manufacturer. Nobody is surprised by Apple's direction here, but it's absolutely possible to design a nice, high-end thin and light laptop with socketed RAM and storage, and many manufacturers are doing just that.

kevin_thibedeau• 6 years ago

It's just laziness. The interior of modern laptops is mostly space that can be filled by batteries. Laptop packaging is far easier than it was 25 years ago. A screw on cover and a pluggable cable aren't going to ruin anybody's precious design.

benologist• 6 years ago

I think if there is any company that could wow us with upgradeability and repairability, it would be Apple after they decided to innovate in those areas.

ogre_codes6• 6 years ago

I don't think laptops should be designed to optimize relatively rare events like battery swaps over day-to-day use. My MacBook Air is 8? years old and I've never cracked the case.

If it's common for MacBook batteries to last 3 years as it has for you, that's a far bigger concern than the fact that it's difficult to replace. I think that's pretty uncommon though, I don't have numbers either way.

jedberg• 6 years ago

I've never cracked the case.

You may want to pop it open and blow the dust out of the fans. They need annual maintenance to run at full efficiency. You might even notice the speedup in your computer if the CPU has been running slower to keep the heat down.

LeoPanthera3• 6 years ago

I don't think laptops should be designed to optimize relatively rare events like battery swaps over day-to-day use.

Is this reversing cause and effect? Battery swaps will indeed be rare if you have to disassemble the entire computer to do it.

kanox• 6 years ago

If the product is 100% carbon neutral then selling multiple copies of that products would have no impact either.

This means that planned obsolescence and being impossible to repair for the user would have no effect on the environment.

openfuture• 6 years ago

That is a huge(!) leap. 'Carbon neutral' does not mean 'no side-effects' it means literally 'carbon neutral' of course there is pollution from the churn of obsoleting devices left and right.

Can we not keep repeating this myopic 'the only problem is X' and then creating a bunch of new problems from not accounting for externalities. I am reminded of the great horse-shit meeting of europe that ended with no solution and then the car came along and everyone was 'yay no more pollution' because for them 'pollution' was horse shit, not exhaust fumes.

Teever• 6 years ago

What about the ecological disruption involved in mining all of the material for those multiple products?

Being carbon neutral isn't sufficient to undo the damage that we have done. We need to become carbon negative.

dwaltrip• 6 years ago

The environment is composed of more than CO2 levels.

GeekyBear• 6 years ago

They're intentionally making devices disposable.

Well no. This is what intentionally making devices disposable looks like.

According to iFixit, the Surface Laptop isn’t repairable at all. In fact, it got a 0 out of 10 for repairability and was labeled a “glue-filled monstrosity.”

The lowest scores previously were a 1 out of 10 for all previous iterations of the Surface Pro

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/251046-ifixit-labels-s...

ksec• 6 years ago

This lay the ground work where Apple will not include a Charger and EarPod in the next iPhone.

They will probably tout it from an Environmental perspective along with the rumour of a braided USB -Lightning Cable. Apple could tout its packaging is 50% reduction in weight, and 30% reduction in total size in shipping. And less Carbon footprint in Shipping. Which will also saves them some money.

From an environmental prospective, Apple is now so far ahead of everyone else in the industry that no company is matching them in theses checkboxes. So far ahead that it would be easier to get ARM to co-Design a competitive SoC against Apple's Ax Series than to catch up these environment issues. From Design, and Sourcing Renewables materials to providing or funding development of renewable energy, to shipping and recycling products.

While I have criticise Apple for many of its design flaws. ( MacBook 2019 Magic Keyboard is still awful, Battery Replacement is still expensive, TouchBar, oversized Trackpad... etc ) Their supply chain operation is second to none and truly a marvel to behold.

CivBase2• 6 years ago

Maybe I'll take Apple's environmental efforts seriously when they stop waging war against independent repair and stop blocking their suppliers from selling replacement parts.

How can you claim to be environmental lt conscious when a huge part of your business is built on suckering customers into buying new, replacement devices when all they want is a repair or replacement for a relatively cheap component?

judge2020• 6 years ago

This is the 15th time this has been talked about, but the reason they starve independent repair is because they can only guarantee a quality repair and/or replace a bad repair when they perform it (or when someone that has gone through their training and certifications has done it). If a customer goes to a repair shop that uses off-brand parts and is sloppy with their repair to the point that the issue re-surfaces in a few months, the customer is likely to blame Apple again instead of whoever did the repair.

CivBase2• 6 years ago

the customer is likely to blame Apple again instead of whoever did the repair.

Says who?

Bad repair shops are a problem, but Apple is exacerbating that problem and they know it. They want people to go the Apple store where their "geniuses" can tell them they have to spend thousands of dollars to replace a main board when the actual problem is a bent pin or an unplugged battery. They want independent repair to have a bad name so they can keep getting away with that nonsense.

How are independent repair shops supposed to use on-brand parts when Apple wont even sell them at a reasonable price without some ridiculous contract?

Apple's independent repair program is complete BS. Expensive parts, a lackluster part selection, and frivolous certifications are one thing, but that's not enough for Apple. Their independent repair program essentially prevents shops from doing anything more than simple screen and battery replacements. If they offer services beyond that, Apple revokes the shop's "privilege" to purchase overpriced OEM components.

They say they want to prevent customers from being scammed by bad repair shops, but Apple's scam is just as bad. They want you to buy new devices, regardless of whether you want them, and they will trick you into buying them if they think they can get away with it.

oliwarner• 6 years ago

By 2030?! Is this serious?

If you want to trade in green credentials, do it today. They could offset their entire operation with a few calls. They have the cash to do it. They could take more active steps in short order too. Waiting 10 years to meet the target is a poor show.

Apple commits to be 100% carbon neutral for supply chain and products by 2030

Related Stories