Which companies do you think are most environmentally friendly? (poll)

Laptop Logos Apple Dell Ms Yoga Hp Main
Laptop Logos Apple Dell Ms Yoga Hp Main (Image credit: Daniel Rubino/Windows Central)

We cover a lot of Microsoft's environmental initiatives (opens in new tab) at Windows Central, but Microsoft is far from the only big tech company making moves in this area. Apple is largely seen as one of the leaders in this area, and plenty of other companies have made big gains in recent years.

As we approach Earth Day on April 22, we wanted to get your thoughts on which companies are the most environmentally friendly. Don't think of this just in terms of facts and figures, either; we're also talking about perception.

Below is a poll that includes a list of several of the bigger names in tech, and we'd like to hear your thoughts on which are the most environmentally friendly in your mind. You can choose as many or as few as you want. But after you've made your choices, we'd love to hear from you in the comments.

On April 22, we'll check back in on the results of the poll and follow up with some of your comments.

Dan Thorp-Lancaster is the former Editor-in-Chief of Windows Central. He began working with Windows Central, Android Central, and iMore as a news writer in 2014 and is obsessed with tech of all sorts. You can follow Dan on Twitter @DthorpL and Instagram @heyitsdtl

23 Comments
  • Shame there isn't an option for "It doesn't matter to you".
  • It's a shame that you didn't realize that you have the option of silence if you are not going to participate.
  • No one wants to hear from the "I don't care" group, which I'm going to guess is the 50-70 white male, American demographic 😂
  • That seems like a racist comment. Not that I'm offended. I choose not to be offended by other people. Also, "no one" is probably not accurate. However, with that said, I think there is some value in seeing what percentage of people don't make purchasing or business choices including that criteria. THAT is why I commented.
  • So you don't understand how racism works either...
  • i am white, and 70, and do give a ****.
  • Nice racist comment, Rubino.
  • Not actually racist.
  • Do you open every article you come across to announce whether or not you care? I would think most people who really don't care would just move right along to something else.
  • As I mentioned before, I think there's some value in the data indicating whether or not this is a criteria that someone makes a business/purchase decision on. Without that data point, there is an incorrect assumption that EVERYONE considers that aspect when comparing the companies. I'm not making a judgment call on whether that's good or bad, simply that it should be considered as a datapoint. Instead, it evoked an arguably racist, sexist and age-ist comment. Which is fine....water off of a duck's back, as far as I'm concerned.
  • It's not arguably any of those things. It's just demographics. Older white men are, as a group, the least engaged on environmental issues.
  • We are not least engaged, we have lived long enough to know that it really doesn't matter in whole scheme of things. All of the threats of "what will happen if" never seen to happen.
  • Wait what? They all happened so far... You just like to either close your eyes, turn your head, forget fast or a combo of all three... But so far the boomers are probably the shittiest irresponsible generation with the most consequence to inaction we have seen in a long long time... Not sure our grand parents with 2 world wars will have messed up things as much as you did so far... And you guys still don't care.. It'd be up to me there would be no confinement.. Let you guys try your luck like you did with everything else without caring for the consequences
  • True, we totally aren't in a 20 year and running drought in the west and half of southeastern Australia didn't just burn down. No consequences so far!
  • where is the poll?
  • I don't know what to choose as all of these companies are taking steps in both directions simultanintsly. A good example of this is apple, letting you trade in your old tech but trying to make customers upgrade quicker and not encouraging the consumer to consider a pre-owned device means that this story will always be a double-edged sword in my opinion.
  • I would like to know the readers opinions on Tesla. I'm really surprised to see it in third place on the poll.
  • Apple, they care enough to make a point about it at every presentation.
  • I was looking for a "none of the above" option. I'm a cynic and believe all giant companies only care about their bottom line.
    Most environmental initiatives they undertake are only to garner positive press.
  • I voted for Apple because they recycle old phones and sell them as brand new with SE name on it. 😁
  • Although I haven't used an Apple product as a daily driver to date it is my impression that Apple seems more environmentally friendly. For me the milestones are recyclability, repairability, component support and software updates. Apple is far from perfect, but I get the impression they do try their best to make good products and try to maintain longterm software servicing. Apple even considers taking in their products for recycling. I've thought about Microsoft but I think the company is a bit of a black box in terms of environmentally friendly mantra. On the one hand there is longterm software servicing, but have often surprised us with uncertain support cycles and disappointing transitions. Hardware is a huge patchwork of durable and obsolete devices with a short shelf life and uncertain ewaste management.
    But the term environmentally friendly is a broad term and can be interpreted. Personally I have an impression Microsoft can do better, but really for other tech companies too. My milestone expectations are better repairability longterm and longterm software support cycles. All this for better value through long term investment and reducing the growing globally poorly managed ewaste.
  • Any company that builds products that are unserviceable, unfixable or are expected to be replaced every 2-5 years have no right to fly the environmental awareness flag. Products that can be maintained and repaired locally don't end up in a landfill site. They don't end up on epic repair or replacement journeys, involving lots of heavy transport from home-to-depot-to-airport-to-depot-to factory and back to depot and..... you get the idea. Devices that are repairable and maintainable by local firms will get used and used and used until they fall apart. Most of us like new things, but we also like to squeeze value out of possessions. We don't want to have to go to the expense of replacing phones every 2-3 years or tablets every 4-5 years. There's no reason every tablet or phone shouldn't be repairable through a good, local repair outlet. If your phone/tablet dies, can you take it to your local PC repair shop to be fixed? In 99% of cases the answer is no. My Surface Pro died. Knowing the answer already, I took it to a local PC shop. The owner took one look and said there's simply no way to fix it. My only option would be to ship it back to Microsoft. A van picks it up from my home and takes it to a depot, where a bigger truck will take it to the airport, where it'll be flown halfway around Europe to a big factory, where they'll repair it, or break it down for spare parts. The refurbished device will then recreate the same long, carbon heavy journey back to me. Every time Microsoft or Apple, or any other company, makes a product with a life expectancy of a few short years, and doesn't give you an option to open that device up and try to get every last bit of value out of it, they're using their business model to flout responsible environmental practice. Don't let their public relations machine tell you otherwise.
  • @Jcmg62 Couldn't agree more. Like you, I don't care what company does it as all of them that engage in this "throw it away economy and buy a new one" are actively advancing the ruin of our society. While it's true Capitalism was the best system humans have ever devised it has evolved into the necessity of endless economic growth to sustain it which in itself is unsustainable without destroying the planet. The worst part is I can't see how this ends without massive global upheaval. Resources will gradually evaporate leading to conflicts between nations to ensure access to those dwindling resources. The only thing I know for sure is the world cannot sustain the current economic model and only pain and suffering will be the result.