Greenpeace vs. Apple, Part Trey

So Greenpeace has come out with their third report on the evils that computer giants do. There's a few differences here; Apple is now all alone in the red, while Lenovo, that company no one ever heard of, has rocketed to the top of the list in 6 months. A few of the other guys switched positions as well.

Greenpeace is getting more involved in green computing and some items, such as their trouncing of Vista, I completely agree with. This electronic report thing I can't figure out though, particularly the Apple stance. GP has now approached Al Gore to do something about the problem as he sits on the board of Apple. Yes, Apple has a poor takeback program. Personally, I do find that to be a big minus for Apple. They are often compared to Dell's 'global recycling program', although, as Keith points out, Dell doesn't recycle in 30 some odd countries, particularly Latin America and the Caribbean.

Other folks are dissecting the report again, I don't need to do that. But here are my questions:

• Why were these manufacturers chosen?
• How is it possible that Lenovo, the big loser, could go from last to first place in 6 months? What does this say about the rating system?
• Why does GP continue to use language like "Sony-Ericsson... ...took up our demand ", suggesting that they are forcing these companies to do these things?
• When is this going to end?