Microsoft

Microsoft – for marketing Windows 7 as green whilst encouraging consumers to buy new PCs

This year, Microsoft has been advertising its new ‘green’ version of Windows with a widespread campaign, but it has also been encouraging consumers to increase their carbon footprint by buying a new computer early in order to make the most of the ‘green’ software. We therefore charge this global giant with greenwashing.

Too little too late

Microsoft’s new version of its flagship package, known as Windows 7, seems like a great option for green consumers. The company claims the package reduces carbon footprints because it is more energy efficient than its last version, Vista.

The greenness can be achieved through little touches such as allowing users to more easily dim their screens, and enabling companies to run power-efficiency tests.

We could congratulate Microsoft on such advancements, even though it’s surprising those technological geniuses couldn’t come up with these changes long ago.

Buy a new PC

However, we are more concerned that Microsoft is encouraging users to go out and buy a new computer in order to be able to use the package to full effect. Some UK stores have even created their own Windows 7 posters carrying the slogan ‘Time for a new PC’. And, the company’s director of consumer product management has been quoted as saying that the vast majority of people that get Windows 7 will move to new hardware.

So, Microsoft has created a situation where millions, or even billions, of consumers are being urged to go green by buying new machines, when they might have been perfectly happy to have used their existing computer for several more years.

Manufacture and disposal footprint

Environmentalists claim that the largest portion of a computer’s carbon footprint is tied up in the manufacture and disposal of that product, rather than the way it operates. So, it is more likely that those buying new hardware for Microsoft Windows 7, will be increasing their carbon footprint rather than reducing it.

Microsoft needs to be much more responsible if it really cares about carbon footprints. If it genuinely can’t make greener technology that works on existing machines, or that can’t be installed through a simple upgrade (which is the case for Microsoft customers using versions older than Vista) it needs to let consumers know that to continue using their current machine until it reaches the end of its natural life might indeed be the greener option.

There is real concern among green consumers that many companies are intent on making us buy the latest version of their products through creating ones that either have a short shelf life or aren’t compatible with other pieces of technology.

Why Microsoft is a winner

We are lambasting Microsoft for greenwashing consumers into feeling they need to fork out more money and ditch their old computers to be green, when sticking to their old machine could well be the lower carbon option.

Did CI get it right? Who would you have chosen? Leave your comments on the CI blog.