>Don't forget the environmental impact of a smaller box
Compared to the marginal environmental impact to source materials, build hardware and parts, assemble, ship, stock, and transport to customer each unit, the box could be 10x larger and it wouldn't make a dent.
> ship ... the box could be 10x larger and it wouldn't make a dent
This is not how shipping works.
A larger box, even by 1 inch on any direction, absolutely makes a huge difference when shipping in manufacturing quantities. Let's not pretend physical volume doesn't exist just to make an argument.
10 planes flying with MacBooks == much different than 1 plane (in other words, when you 10x the size of something, as you suggest, it does actually have a huge impact)
The point being made is "it's not the paper fr the box that's the issue".
A smaller box allows more to be carried. But if we go that route, it's trivial to ship them without any box and box them domestically - and that's a 2-3x volume reduction right there.
> it's trivial to ship them without any box and box them domestically
Ah yeah I can't imagine any scenario where this could go wrong
Like man in the middle attacks
Replacement/fake products
... or you know, damage? Boxes provide... protection.
> it's trivial
Anytime you catch yourself thinking something is trivial, you're probably trivializing it (aka think about it more and you'll probably be able to think of a dozen more reasons packaging products is the norm)
Compared to the marginal environmental impact to source materials, build hardware and parts, assemble, ship, stock, and transport to customer each unit, the box could be 10x larger and it wouldn't make a dent.