On Oct 15, 2007, at 10:55 PM, Joshua Penix wrote:
it seems that Motorola and SE still have a way to go themselves, so why isn't Greenpeace giving them a hard time? And why the hard-on for the iPhone? If Greenpeace were trying to do as much good as possible, shouldn't they be going after the iPod, which has sold a hundredfold more units than the iPhone?
Greenpeace seriously seems to have a hard-on for Apple. I can't quite figure it out, myself, unless it's simply because Apple has such huge "mind-share" today, what with the popularity of iPods and the iPhone, and the resurgence of Mac as a platform. I think Greenpeace is simply trying to capitalize on Apple's popularity to make itself seem relevant again.
Apple is definitely not the only one with these bad substances in its products, and certainly not the worst offender. It's just that nobody really give s a shit about Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, Sanyo, HP or Dell anymore; they're simply not visible enough (probably because they all make the same bland stuff).
Now, in addition to having to live up to their stated goals, they also have to live up to fantasy goals created by organizations who decide from the outside what Apple "could have done."
Well, having been following a good number of the iPhone lawsuits, it seems that's what's in vogue in the legal arena these days. (Specifically regarding lawsuits aiming at the AT&T locking and the price drop)
:) Gregory -- Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP Key ID: EAF4844B keyserver: pgpkeys.mit.edu
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
