Every year, April 22 is "World Earth Day", which was officially established as early as 1970, hoping to call on people to change the global environment through green and low-carbon life. This was originally a good thing, but inadvertently became a "shield" for some people, in the name of protecting the earth, to harm the interests of consumers, such as some brands that do not send chargers.
Apple officially canceled the charger from the iPhone 12 series, and users need to spend hundreds of yuan to buy it separately, giving the reason for the fig leaf of "scientific and technological environmental protection". A few days ago, a Brazilian court ruled that Apple's cancellation of the attached charger is a "crime" and needs to compensate users for nearly 7,000 yuan, how will Apple respond?
On the occasion of the 53rd World Earth Day, Apple officially posted: No longer comes with a charger, this change is indeed quite bold. However, apple has saved an estimated 550,000 tons of copper, tin and zinc ore. Apple is willing to reduce the exploitation of the earth's resources, which is well worth it. At the same time, after canceling the charger in the publicity, the user's unboxing is described as "let the joy of unboxing, and then be lighter."
Is Apple's statement true, and is it justified? It is safe to say that Apple's statement is not wrong at all, but it does not make the slightest sense, because all the responses are "stealing concepts" and achieving their own goals by confusing the public. After Apple canceled the charger, these items did not disappear from the world out of thin air, and no one had a demand for the charger. The truth is that Apple sells the charger list that should have come with it, which is a sense of "material conservation", so does Apple really achieve the so-called "environmental protection"?
I believe that all the friends who are reading this article, everyone must have a demand for the charger, there should be no local tycoon to buy a new mobile phone only once, no power shutdown after the direct throw away, replace the new right? Even if your financial resources can support this, but you have to transfer data once a day, normal people should not do this. It can be determined that all people who use mobile phones, whether it is Android or Apple, whether it is a thousand-yuan machine or a million-dollar flagship, everyone has a demand for a charger.
Open Apple's self-operated store on an e-commerce platform, search for the three words "charger", you can find that Apple's 20W, 12W charger demand is very high, have reached 5 million + level of evaluation. This shows that consumer demand for chargers has not been reduced at all, but after Apple cancels the incident, consumers can only buy separately from Apple, and the consumption demand for chargers has not decreased in the slightest, let alone reduce the consumption of 550,000 tons of metal ore per year.
And there is a point more important, Apple's current charger needs to be individually packaged, transported, sold, distributed, each link will increase a lot of packaging, plastic, transportation energy cost consumption. Calculated in this way, is Apple making a huge effort to "scientific and technological environmental protection" for the earth, or has it increased the waste of resources through a new charger sales model? Many people around the world have asked this question, and as of now, Apple has refused to answer the relevant questions, and every time it uses the concept of environmental protection brought by the cancellation of the charger.
Friends, do you think that after Apple cancels the charger, it is really convenient for consumers and promotes environmental protection, or has it caused consumers a variety of inconveniences and wasted resources?