Vista - bad for the environment, bad for you?

[aidanjm]

There is an argument that widespread adoption of vista will have a negative impact on the environment. The argument goes that because Vista requires higher spec computers to run many individuals and businesses will be forced to upgrade to more powerful computers, which will consume more energy to run. Older computers may be disposed of which will also have possible negative environmental consequences. (Computers contain numerous toxic materials which can leach into the environment). At the micro level, Vista is a fun new toy to play with. At the scale of entire populations, arguably, Vista is possibly an evil the world could do without. What do you think?

Article:
Greens: Vista means more dead PCs

The Green Party has claimed that Microsoft's latest operating system, Vista, could lead to a mass upgrade of PCs that will result in old machines being dumped in landfill sites.

Speaking ahead of the official UK consumer launch of Vista on Tuesday, Derek Wall, Green Party male principal speaker, warned that migrating to the operating system would result in many consumers and businesses having to buy new hardware and bin perfectly usable old kit.

"Vista requires more expensive and energy-hungry hardware, passing the cost on to consumers and the environment," Wall said. "This will also further exclude the poor from the latest technology, and impose burdensome costs on small and medium businesses who will be forced to enter another expensive upgrade cycle."

...

Rather than opting for another proprietary OS, the Green Party argues that businesses should look into free software alternatives ? such as Linux ? as they don't require high-specification hardware. "Free software can run on existing hardware, reduces licensing costs for small businesses and affords important freedoms to consumers. The UK government should capitalise on this opportunity to promote the use of free software in public bodies," added Wall.

...

The Green Party's warning about the environmental impact of Vista follows a similar statement from the British Computer Society (BCS) in December last year. Nigel Shadbolt, BCS president, said the release of Vista could eventually see large numbers of PCs being upgraded and many old PCs discarded. "PCs contain many toxic components, so if they end up in a landfill we are creating a real problem for the future. It can be really easy to pass on the old machine to be reused, and if it's beyond use, to recycle it," Shadbolt said.

 

[Stumps]

Grow up....do you have to post this sort of crap all the time?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Stumps
Grow up....do you have to post this sort of crap all the time?

thank you for your considered response

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

It's rather hard to stay objective when the claim is made by the Green Party with nothing proven. As a side note, tomorrow headline reads: Vista Causes Global Warming. Apples Rotten.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: BehindEnemyLines
It's rather hard to stay objective when the claim is made by the Green Party with nothing proven. As a side note, we'll have a headline tomorrow that reads: Vista Causes Global Warming. Apples Rotten.

widespread adoption of more power-hungry machines (more powerful graphics chips) can't be a good thing for the environment, surely?

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Many of you will be forced to upgrade your systems to run Vista.

Yeah, that 15-gram Corsair TurboFlash I bought for ReadyBoost is going to really bog down the landfill someday.

Apart from costing you hard earned dollars which could, no doubt, be better spent elsewhere, your new computer will consume more power placing a greater burden on the environment.

Right, those $20 TurboFlash drives certainly are expensive and consume a lot of power.

I don't know if you noticed, but CPU power consumption is on the decline, so getting people to retire their Prescotts and Northwoods in favor of new Athlon64s and C2Ds, combined with new high-efficiency PSUs, is actually going to reduce power consumption, not increase it. The majority of Vista-equipped new PCs will undoubtedly be running on... integrated graphics, same as always. Not 8800GTX SLI. And if they have add-in cards, they'll probably be meek 15-watt jobbies like X1300s. You can do the research at Dell, HP and Emachines' sites and let us know what you find.

You will, perhaps, dispose of your old PC. The toxic materials contained in your old PC will leach into the environment causing untold damage.

I will, perhaps, not dispose of my old PC, since I need it to install Vista on it.

"So what?", you say. "What difference does a single PC make?"

Multiply your own experience by a billion (the number of Windows installations worldwide) and we can see that Vista will have a significant negative impact re: the environment. One might even suggest that widespread adoption of Vista will be another factor contributing to accelerated global warming. The costs of this environmental damage won't be paid for by M$. Rather, the cost is offset from M$ and becomes a burden for each of us through increased taxes and a decline in quality of life associated with climate change and environmental destruction.

...said the person who probably has a 1000kg motor vehicle, and buys gasoline every week or two, and drives it when he really doesn't need to. Close? I drive this most of the time, and I think I bought gasoline only three times last year (none of which, obviously, was used in that vehicle). Your turn.

At the micro level, Vista is a fun new toy to play with. At the scale of entire populations, Vista is definitely an evil that the world could well do without.

The sad irony is that you could get a significant increase in performance, security and stability from your *current* machine simply by switching to a well-designed operating system, e.g., a linux variant or a bsd variant.

The sad irony is that we could get major increases in security by just getting people to use Windows security capabilities properly. Windows stability is fantastic unless the hardware is bad, in my experience. I don't see how the user performance would change since I'm using the same hardware, but I'm pretty sure I can't run some of my 3D-accelerated software on them.

 

[Aberforth]

Software and Hardware go hand in hand, if you have powerful hardware you need powerful software. This has always been the case with every OS release. When XP came out many were thinking of not upgrading but now the same people say "stay with XP". People don't like change, they want to stay with what they are used to- they always want value for money- this unfortunately doesn't happen in the computer world because new things keep coming every day. People adapt change and get on with life, this is why the PC platform is the best platform which gives users options to upgrade various hardware and software and almost 90% of the world uses PC (they are not stupid) and not MAC. Any good thing can drive people crazy- like Geforce 8800 for example so why MAC hasn't taken over? Because it sucks. Apple wastes too much time on bragging and criticizing MS - at the end of the day only flashy stuff of their OS remains and not productivity which most people prefer. I say why don't you stick with Windows 3.1 - can you do that ? no, because you want to take advantage of the new stuff thats out there and you badly want to play that new game thats out...

EDIT: The best we can do is use Nature friendly wallpapers in Vista

 

[tcsenter]

This lunacy seems to be driven more by some juvenile disdain for Microsoft than sincere 'concern' for the environment (fairly typical of environmentalists and Microsoft haters).

Why does Microsoft get singled-out as bad for the environment but not, say, the developers of Doom 3, Far Cry, Photoshop, and the other applications or technologies that push the contemporary envelope of computing power (i.e. HD video encoding/transcoding)?

By this guy's logic, a worse polluter would have to be the frame-rate zealots who build raging dual-core SLI systems sporting dual monitors and 600+ watt PSUs for browsing the web and running benchmarks, when they could be out doing something constructive with their time and money instead of playing games, like 'saving the environment'.

 

[dguy6789]

Last time I checked, most people have Pentium 4s, and Core 2 Duos and Athlon 64s use less power and are more efficient....

 

[43st]

I consider myself a fairly staunch tree hugger (I offset my car's carbon emission, etc.), and this article is BS. It roots it's argument in using old technology, something we all pretty much know isn't necessarily 'green'. It's like saying a '74 Dodge Duster is better for the environment than a Prius because it's older and has already been built.

I'm using Vista currently...
- It has a customizable power settings menu. You can automatically throttle the CPU multiplier down when it's not being used to save energy. You can also set it's top limits if you're only using it for a internet machine. All can be set up in custom profiles, something certainly not native in XP and probably broken in Linux.
- Benchmarks have shown negligible power consumption differences between Vista and XP, and those didn't included the use of custom low power profiles.
- All my PC parts are 100% RoHS complaint, meaning less lead and mercury in the ground once the lifetime of the gear is over. Can't say that for any older generation.
- I can run my e6600 CPU from one 200mm fan that usually hovers at 650 RPM. Can't do that with the last generation (P4, some of the A64 line), etc.

If I can fault Vista for anything it would be having the default power button suspend the system rather than shut it down completely. At least it's something you can change in the settings.

 

[Markbnj]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: BehindEnemyLines
It's rather hard to stay objective when the claim is made by the Green Party with nothing proven. As a side note, we'll have a headline tomorrow that reads: Vista Causes Global Warming. Apples Rotten.

widespread adoption of more power-hungry machines (more powerful graphics chips) can't be a good thing for the environment, surely?

I think it kind of falls behind 350 horsepower family sedans, and 2.5 ton SUVs, if you're looking for likely targets. What's really bad for the environment is air conditioning, and clamshell packaging for memory chips.

 

[adairusmc]

For every power hungry vista machine that you do not buy, I am going to buy three.

 

[Tipsy Turtle]

Oh please. Like the 3 PC's and 1 laptop I have are doing anywhere near enough damage to be noticable.

You want to blame someone for f'ing up the enviroment? Blame China and India. They are doing far more kicking to Mother Nature's crotch than anyone else on the planet.

 

[jazzboy]

I'm normally one who does like to keep electricty costs down, but this is just stupid.

- Most CPUs sold from 4 years ago are fine for Vista.
- Aero Glass runs fine on most directx 9 GPUs released since 2004 (except Intel's) and even then the Vista Basic mode runs on all video cards with compatible drivers.
- Most hard drives sold from 5 years ago are large & fast enough.

So for most people, it'll only be the RAM that needs upgrading.

Putting in an extra stick of RAM will add about 5W to the power consumption - hardly going to make a difference to the melting ice caps.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
"This will also further exclude the poor from the latest technology

"


I think the others have already shot down your ridiculous environmental assertion but this one slipped by.

Did you not know that a special version of Vista was designed for poor developing countries? MS has every reason to get more people using Windows and shunning the poor is not a way to accomplish this. I also think the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation would take a great deal of offense at the suggestion of excluding the poor.

 

[funkbass81]

whats the matter, did vista club some baby seals?

 

[oldman420]

At the rate that computer technology developes there is so much waste that your point is really moot.
Why not just blame the chip and board manufacturers as they are the ones that really drive the global upgrading of computer equipment or how about the game manufacturers as their software is really the main reason that people upgrade their systems.
I would be willing to bet that most of the machines out there are already vista ready as they are running xp already,overall compared to auto waste and garbage the computer industry and it's users waste is insignificant.

 

[Markbnj]

You want to blame someone for f'ing up the enviroment? Blame China and India. They are doing far more kicking to Mother Nature's crotch than anyone else on the planet.

Exactly. They are spewing out tons more crap, and lack even the most basic of the controlling regulatory environment that we have built over the last forty years.

 

[sam509]

Do you think it is just a coincidence that Vista was released and then there were tornados in FL that killed dozens? Do you?:shocked:

 

[VooDooAddict]

mechBgon said most of what I was looking to say and more.

The only thing I'd like to add is that scientific progress causes waste. How mindful of the waste and steps we do to reduce the impact it are important. The only thing I'm sure of is that simply stopping the progress and just making due with what we have isn't the best answer. We have to continue progress.

 

[pennhunter]

I celebrated being able to survive acid rain for thirty years by getting Vista. Hopefully this global warming stuff will happen soon because it's 8 degrees here.

 

[InlineFive]

This thread is even worse than the Apple commercial about PC going in for pre-Vista surgery.

 

[timswim78]

Well, to me it seems as though the newer generation of CPU's are more efficient than the generation that we are finishing. So, there may be a decrease in power consumption. Also, Vista is designed with many power saving features that allow the user to do many tasks (such as watch a movie) without even turning the computer on.

 

[Cardio]

Originally posted by: adairusmc
For every power hungry vista machine that you do not buy, I am going to buy three.

That and I'll raise you 2......

Actually if the Green's are so concerned, the real problem is over population needing all this stuff like food, cars, heat, computers....why not do the planet a favor and dig a nice enviornmentally correct hole and cover yourself up. Would also spare us the concern that you might reproduce.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: 43st
- Benchmarks have shown negligible power consumption differences between Vista and XP, and those didn't included the use of custom low power profiles.

I think the point is Vista will force many people to upgrade to machines with beefier specs - particularly with beefier graphics chips, which use more energy.