This is journalism, though, not science. The point isn't to answer the question, just to document the controversy. Apple says one thing. Another party with relevant qualifications says that they are wrong. And the subject has previously been covered in the media, so it's newsworthy. They even contacted Apple for a response. I don't see anything weird here at all.
I will say, though, that if Apple truly felt their glue allows for easy disassembly, they probably wouldn't have withdrawn from EPEAT in the first place.
> This is journalism, though, not science. The point isn't to answer the question, just to document the controversy.
Or in many cases, create the controversy.
Edit: But anyway, the article does fine with the journalism part. I was just thinking that people should probably wait to see if the rating really is ridiculous or not. I've certainly never taken a MBP apart. So I have no idea if it is easy or not. Either way, I have no more reason to trust one over the other.
I think rather it's much more straight forward, Apple's mobile devices make up the bulk of their income, it's where they're pointing their business as a whole now. A growing segment of their mobile device sales aren't covered by any EPEAT certification at all (iPhone/iPad). Future Apple devices are going to be increasingly complex to disassemble, and this is seen as a competitive issue too, in the pursuit of thinner, stronger and more attractive enclosures. I think they were just getting out of EPEAT before EPEAT caught up to mobile devices, a quiet exit (or so they hoped.)
I will say, though, that if Apple truly felt their glue allows for easy disassembly, they probably wouldn't have withdrawn from EPEAT in the first place.