Freecycle: Disposing of Good Old Stuff

My son just bought a new Mac notebook because the hard drive gave out
on his last notebook. Plus, it had a broken bevel on the screen. It
didn't seem it was worth $500 to $700 to fix a three year old
notebook. I was going to send the thing back to Apple for recycling,
but my wife listed it on our local Freecycle and four people
immediately wanted it (bad disk and all). The person who picked it up
told me that he was going to replace the disk and load Linux for the
PPC and MystTV on it. He uses old notebooks as DVRs since their form
factor fits right next to a regular TV.

I suggest that anyone who has some old electronics that they believe
they can no longer use to list them on Freecycle. I've even had
someone just pick up an old 500Mb (That's megabyte, not gigabyte)
Solaris hard drive that I figured was probably only useful as a
doorstop. I have no idea what he plans to to with it -- maybe he has
a door that he wants to keep open -- but he certainly seemed
absolutely pleased by it.

--
David Weintraub
davidweintraubworld.net
davidweintraub.name

> Posted by: Chris Pepper Date: Aug 4, 2007.

> That said, I definitely agree with recycling, but people need
> to make a calculation about value and running costs of whatever
> they're recycling, not just hoard old gear because they can't bear to
> "waste" it.

Agreed (to an extent). 'Hoarding' could also be taken as 'retaining
until a (viable) use for it becomes apparant or possible'. At least
that keeps it out of landfill, potentially (or one step further from
it). And there's lots of ways unviable machines could suddenly become
viable. eg, the availability of a Linux flavour for it, which could
make it being used as a server a realistic proposition as Linux tends
to be less demanding on h/w than MacOS X, or rather achieves better
performance overall on the same h/w. So, it's life is effectively
extended (if you're demanding the same level of performance).

And my last sentence just prompted a slew of other thoughts. Is the
machine *really* non-viable, or are my/we/our expectations of it too
high, or are we using it in the most efficient manner possible?
Occasionally I have to troubleshoot people's PCs and I'm astounded by
how much they knobble their systems due to the loading of unecessary
s/w or lack of even basic maintenance. And they'd be 'thinking of
getting a new one' ! Admittedly, I'm talking about PCs here, but the
principle is the same. Often, just adding addtional RAM makes a big
difference.

Here in the privileged 'developed' world, I think we've become a
little bit unused to just 'making do with what we have'. We want the
latest & greatest and often for its own sake and not for more
practical reasons. The price of that desire is I think not wholly
reflected in the price tag of our shiny new 'toys' and it's time it
should be, to encourage us to work more efficiently with our existing
h/w. Even if that's pie-in-the-sky, then I wonder how possible it is
for us to kind of step down a gear in terms of expectations? Or is
that even more so?

> I'll check out Brooklyn Freecycle once I'm ready to part with
> the PMG4. It seems like a good way of extending the useful life of
> gear, and hopefully I'll find someone who really needs PowerPC or 4
> hard drives.

From what you've said about it, I would try selling it on eBay first.
You may be suprised. However, the thing with eBay or FreeCycle is that
you never know to what use it will be put after it's sold or
collected. You might want to donate it to a charity which at least
*claims* to put your old h/w to good use (as vs. just taking out the
ram & chucking the box) eg:

<http://www.computerswithcauses.org/>

Regards,

GAM

On 8/6/07 11:25 AM, "Glen McAllister" <glen.mcallistergmail.com> wrote:

> And there's lots of ways unviable machines could suddenly become
> viable. eg, the availability of a Linux flavour for it, which could
> make it being used as a server a realistic proposition as Linux tends
> to be less demanding on h/w than MacOS X, or rather achieves better
> performance overall on the same h/w. So, it's life is effectively
> extended (if you're demanding the same level of performance).

Not as much as it used to. Linux is also gradually needing better hardware
to run efficiently, particularly the desktop flavors.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

Glen McAllister wrote:
> And my last sentence just prompted a slew of other thoughts. Is the
> machine *really* non-viable, or are my/we/our expectations of it too
> high, or are we using it in the most efficient manner possible?
> Occasionally I have to troubleshoot people's PCs and I'm astounded by
> how much they knobble their systems due to the loading of unecessary
> s/w or lack of even basic maintenance. And they'd be 'thinking of
> getting a new one' ! Admittedly, I'm talking about PCs here, but the
> principle is the same. Often, just adding addtional RAM makes a big
> difference.
>
> Here in the privileged 'developed' world, I think we've become a
> little bit unused to just 'making do with what we have'. We want the
> latest & greatest and often for its own sake and not for more
> practical reasons. The price of that desire is I think not wholly
> reflected in the price tag of our shiny new 'toys' and it's time it
> should be, to encourage us to work more efficiently with our existing
> h/w. Even if that's pie-in-the-sky, then I wonder how possible it is
> for us to kind of step down a gear in terms of expectations? Or is
> that even more so?

If you use your computer to type letters and run Quicken 2003 then system 9 on a PM 7100 might still be ok. IF you need to work with a lot of banking setups, employee web sites, HTML email, etc... then many times you need current browsers, Java, email clients, etc... and these old system just don't cut it. You just can't add much ram (by today's standard) into a 7100, 8100, 7300, etc...

I use a G4/733 with a gig of ram and it drags at times for the things I do. And if you do much in the way of graphical work, you'll be limited to very old programs and have a hard time dealing with trading files.

And don't even think about current games. :)

David Ross

I also joined FreeCycle this week. In Santa Monica you must pay 50¢ a pound to the City to dispose of Computer equipment. I advertised a printer I wasn't using any longer and 10 people responded with 10 minutes. I gave it to the guy who needed it to print out his resume. The next day I posted a Pokemon Monopoly game that my son hadn't looked at in years. I gave it to a woman who's 8-yar-old son loves Pokemon and just had a brain tumor removed. Tomorrow the fax machine is going. I'm hooked on getting rid of stuff I don't have room for, but can't bring myself to throw out.

I have used Freecycle in Tucson, AZ (where Freeecycle originated) both to give away and to acquire items. Almost all interactions have been positive, and I've encountered old friends (people, not items!) occasionally. It's a great opportunity.

On 8/7/07, tidbits-talktidbits.com <tidbits-talktidbits.com> wrote:

> Message #4: Re: Freecycle: Disposing of Good Old Stuff
> Posted by: dr Date: Aug 6, 2007.
>.....

> And don't even think about current games. :)

I don't. That's part of my 'stepping down a gear in expectations'. See
the way it (could) work?

Regards,

GAM

> > Here in the privileged 'developed' world, I think we've become a
> > little bit unused to just 'making do with what we have'. We want the
> > latest & greatest and often for its own sake and not for more
> > practical reasons. The price of that desire is I think not wholly
> > reflected in the price tag of our shiny new 'toys' and it's time it
> > should be, to encourage us to work more efficiently with our
> existing
> > h/w. Even if that's pie-in-the-sky, then I wonder how possible it is
> > for us to kind of step down a gear in terms of expectations? Or is
> > that even more so?
>
> If you use your computer to type letters and run Quicken 2003 then
> system 9 on a PM 7100 might still be ok. IF you need to work with a
> lot of banking setups, employee web sites, HTML email, etc... then
> many times you need current browsers, Java, email clients, etc...
> and these old system just don't cut it. You just can't add much ram
> (by today's standard) into a 7100, 8100, 7300, etc...
>
> I use a G4/733 with a gig of ram and it drags at times for the
> things I do. And if you do much in the way of graphical work,
> you'll be limited to very old programs and have a hard time dealing
> with trading files.
>
I don't particularly care for new shiny toys but I work in graphics
and there is no way to make a living without buying new stuff. I
can't work with old programs if companies I work with use new
programs, and even if I could, the hardware isn't as reliable as it
was even in the 1990s. I bought my daughter an ibook 2 1/2 years ago
-- she had the screen and drive replaced already through AppleCare,
and now it's coming up on 3 years and she is traveling the world... I
don't believe I can sort out her problems while she's in China so I'm
considering getting her a new laptop. Maybe it's unnecessary high-
gear, maybe it's just insurance given that you can't buy AppleCare
for something that's 3 years old.

Take Control of Troubleshooting Your Mac says that (pg. 47)

> In particular, some iMac G5 models had a manu-
> facturing defect that resulted in this symptom and required
> replacement of the defective parts (both my wife and I had models
> with this issue—and we were extremely glad they were covered
> by AppleCare!).

To me, that seemed to suggest that it's okay for business to be
churning out defective equipment and expect buyers to buy insurance
for it.

I went the other day to install a second internal drive on my G5
desktop and the data cable was missing. I called Apple and the first
thing they said was, "our records show that this computer is no
longer under warrantee" (although *I think* they agreed to take a
look if I took it over to the Apple store). My partner advises me to
buy a laptop so I can part with the desktop for a few days -- his
laptop has suddenly died, too, and no one is really upset because
it's almost 5 years old (wow!). If I complain about the digital
camera or the iPod that never made it to their second birthday, he
says, "think of it as rental."

I don't buy AppleCare for desktops, I grudgingly buy it for laptops,
and I view the proliferation of extended warrantees for electronic
gear as a racket, but maybe it's just the tip of the iceberg of the
whole "forced obsolescence" scheme (to borrow Steve Wozniak's term
from an interview on NPR).

I have put in a lot of effort over the years into various recycling
and reducing and giving away, but I don't believe that this type of
sporadic individual effort makes a dent in what should be done matter-
of-factly at an entirely different level. "Reduce" isn't going to
work if the entire economy is based on urging people to buy more and
for companies to make/sell more, whether or not anyone needs the
stuff. Voluntary is all very well and good up to a point. I also take
my own canvas bag to the grocery store -- it doesn't stop the other
100 billion plastic bags from being produced and tossed out every year.

For good used digital cameras, I was happy with <usedcamerabuyer.com> The check was not large, UPS delivery was free, and it saved time in finding an organization or school willing to receive a digital camera.

maryanneso wrote:
> I also joined FreeCycle this week. In Santa Monica you must pay 50¢ a
> pound to the City to dispose of Computer equipment. I advertised a
> printer I wasn't using any longer and 10 people responded with 10
> minutes. I gave it to the guy who needed it to print out his resume.
> The next day I posted a Pokemon Monopoly game that my son hadn't
> looked at in years. I gave it to a woman who's 8-yar-old son loves
> Pokemon and just had a brain tumor removed. Tomorrow the fax machine
> is going. I'm hooked on getting rid of stuff I don't have room for,
> but can't bring myself to throw out.

The world is full of folks who would rather "get it over" on someone that work for a living. I can't help but wonder how much free cycle stuff gets taken by folks who resell it in their used store or scrap it and throw away the unwanted parts in the "creek".

I tend to doubt that the freecycle groups do a background "green" check on folks. :)

David

sgoldhargmail.com wrote:
> I have put in a lot of effort over the years into various recycling
> and reducing and giving away, but I don't believe that this type of
> sporadic individual effort makes a dent in what should be done matter-
> of-factly at an entirely different level. "Reduce" isn't going to
> work if the entire economy is based on urging people to buy more and
> for companies to make/sell more, whether or not anyone needs the
> stuff. Voluntary is all very well and good up to a point. I also take
> my own canvas bag to the grocery store -- it doesn't stop the other
> 100 billion plastic bags from being produced and tossed out every year.
>
And this is a subject where I have to ask. Is a canvas bag "better"?

What is the life cycle cost & energy footprint of the canvas bag compared to the the plastic ones? It certainly costs more to make and ship the canvas bag. And you have to wash it periodically. (If you don't think this is much of an issue, you don't have kids and/or pets.) And if you have a family of any size you get to own 4 to 8 of them.

I've always suspected that the manufacturing, distribution, cleaning, and at some point disposal of such bags is harder on the environment than the plastic ones. Do we include subsidies for home grown cotton or is this bag made in China and shipped on a cargo ship across the Pacific? But to be honest this is based on my background and intuition, not on facts. And I also understand these costs can vary. Using water in Las Vegas or around Raleigh where I live is a really big deal. Using water to wash clothes in New Orleans isn't nearly as much of a big deal. Which also puts an interesting twist on the cloth vs. disposable diaper discussion.

Anyway, I'd love to see a full life cycle analysis.

David Ross