This week we’ve had Greenpeace penning a guest blog about toxic chemicals in clothes. We also revealed Samsung’s new matte laptops and said farewell to 60W light bulbs. Here’s what you’ve been saying…
Are you sad to see them go? Dave D is:
‘As per usual Joe Public is being forced into having no choice at all of inferior products which may yet turn out to be dangerous to our health whilst being insulted by being told we have greater choice than ever.’
Phil isn’t quite so against the change, but thinks we can decide for ourselves:
‘I’ve already changed most of the bulbs to CFLs but there are a couple of places where I still need incandescents. What really annoys me is the way in which we’re continually forced into these changes by legislation. If something offers a real advantage to consumers they’ll buy it and the old product will eventually become obsolete, if it doesn’t it’ll die off.’
Samsung goes back to matte with new laptops
Photographer Fotolawrence says he’s been searching for a laptop with a matte screen:
‘I thought that I was in the minority so was pleased to come across this site. You have my vote for getting matte screens back on the market.’
Steve T upgraded to MacBook Pro recently:
‘I opted for the matte screen as I could see a major disadvantage with a glossy screen when, for example, working on the train with sunlight shining through the windows. For the matte screen (which is additionally higher definition) I had to pay an extra £150 or so.’
Greenpeace calls the fashion police over chemicals in clothes
Our guest blog from Greenpeace revealed its research about the toxic chemicals clothes manufacturers are using in our garbs. Here’s how Frugal Ways reacted:
‘We, the public, shouldn’t have to use our purchasing power to get action, it should not take a long time to reverse, we shouldn’t have to hope that organisations such as Greenpeace run investigations. If regulators did their job and prosecuted one company and removed it’s range from the shelves, others would sit up and take notice.’
Tamara Stark from Greenpeace UK had this to say in response:
‘Yes, you’re right, regulations should be tighter, but the EU REACH legislation doesn’t yet address imported products – and let’s face it, there’s no time soon when China is going to stop being the world’s factory! So – in the meantime, getting western companies to use their influence to get change on the ground in places like China matters.’
Why buy a 3G version of the Amazon Kindle?
Not many of you agreed with Ben Stevens on this one, especially Andrew:
‘For me, the 3G is definitely worth the extra. I don’t always plan what I read. I download a book that someone has recommended and, if it appeals, then I want the author’s other stuff – fast, wherever I am – and I’m often out of WiFi range.’
Surcharge campaign: help us make a hat trick of successes
We’re trying to stamp out unfair card surcharges and we need your help. Bob Valleley supports us and he gets our Comment of the Week:
‘Why should any retailer be allowed to make a separate charge to the customer for the privilege of receiving their money. It is part of their costs of doing buiness and should be implicit within the price advertised for the goods or services supplied. Define the method of payment yes, but no separate charge.’
Comments have been edited due to length, so make sure to read them in full on their relevant Convos (by clicking on the red title link).