This is actually incorrect:

"While relatively slow to adopt an environmental policy, Apple has been relatively committed to its plans and is on track to eliminate all bromides and chlorides from Macs by the end of 2008 where Dell is no longer promising the same for its own line."

Steve Jobs noted a couple of years ago when GreenPeace decided to have a go at them that they had actually been slowly implementing environmental policies for the last 20 years and has progressively been reducing bad materials.

Look at what Apple has done going from superfluous ports reducing manufacturing costs and environmental impacts, getting rid of CRTs, and now getting rid of fluorescent bulbs in LCDs.

Dell on the other hand don't seem to offer anything overly special in terms of hardware, just off the shelf parts.

Greenpeace knows about as much about pollution science as does Al Gore and the Obamaloon know about any kind of science, and should be regarded with that amount of respect (or lack thereof).

Didn't Greenpeace used to hunt whale hunting boats? Now they hunt computer-makers? I guess that is a lot easier. I wonder how many of those people use Macs?

Going after computer manufacturers is really a sign of desperation on their part. There are so many other really important issues these days. Shame on them for wasting bandwidth with this. That organization is increasingly losing relevance day after day.

Since when did GreenPeace have any relevance...relevance to what...themselves?

They're a group of elitist liberals who want to take Western civilization back to the stone age.

WHO CARES?

I have absolutely no respect for greenpeace. They're the worst kind of attention whores.

Where else do you read about Greenpeace apart from this Apple forum.

As you would see from Greenpeace's own homepage, Apple is not a main topic it's buried somewhere in there.

They're more concerned with the Amazon, Overfishing, Climate, etc. Actually their only tech complaint on their homepage is targeted towards Phillips and their ewaste.

So these greenpeace guys all drive electric vehicles right? No petrol whatsoever. No makeup, toothpaste, hair products, clothes manufactured, man made products........

Green and peace are two very positive, hopeful words that go well together. But notice the rabid vitriol that the words conjure. This organization angers some people. Yet, no one seems to come out and say - "Peace and the environment are not as important as corporate profit." or "Coexisting with each other and the planet are wrong, and I am against the whole concept."

These positions are not defensible, so we say that Greenpeace is meaningless, or boring, or has their priorities wrong. Then swear a little, foam a little, and sign off in disgust.

Still, I think it is good to have SOMEONE looking out for the planet who does not profit from hurting it.

"Greenpeace knows about as much about pollution science as does Al Gore and the Obamaloon know about any kind of science, and should be regarded with that amount of respect (or lack thereof)."

Yeah, not like the Bushies, who believe Dinosaurs roamed the Earth with humans 5,000 years ago, that global warming is an act of God, and that dumping coal waste and mercury in rivers and streams is actually a good thing.

The 10-point scale they have is not based on concrete goals (i.e. Percent of products with mercury in them, packaging-to-product ratio, etc.). According to the Greenpeace site, the scale is based on "Leading mobile and PC Manufacturers on their global policies and practice on eliminating harmful chemicals and on taking responsibility for their products once they are discarded by consumers. Companies are ranked on information that is publicly available and clarifications and communications with the companies." So it's actually a scale that shows how well a company communicates to Greenpeace its efforts to eliminate harmful chemicals. My guess is Apple hangs up whenever Greenpeace calls :-)

Is there really that much of a difference in computer components to make one manufacturer that more environmentally friendly? I would figure that the more computers you build, the less green a company would be. If you build computers to last longer I would also think that would contribute to being more green. Those unibody Macs seem to contain such small circuit boards and very little plastic. Looking at them, you'd figure they'd be more environmentally friendly than most any plastic notebook.

Apple are more afraid of Greenpeace than their own customers. Too bad GP doesn't spend more time on the big three that will gobble up billions of dollars and return nothing.

The ONLY reason Greenpeace is highlighting Apple is because of the high profile of the iPod and Apple in general in the mainstream media recently. It's common knowledge Greenpeace isn't pro-environment as much as they are anti-capitalism. Apple should be commended on the steps we've taken to make it's computers more ecologically friendly by investing in new technologies, research & product development - not reverting back to cave-dwellers.