Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Status of MacVidCards?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am working in LA the next couple of weeks. I just placed my order and sent in my card to arrive on on Thursday May 10th to Macvidcards. I would like to pick it up when it is done. Does anyone have any idea how long they are taking to turn around a card?

Thanks
 
Yep, they finally responded to my third e-mail regarding the 1080Ti, and within a day (I emailed them this past Tues). Never responded to my 2-3 month old e-mails inquiring about the 980's, but that's fine since my new target is the 1080.

In case anyone was wondering, they are currently selling the "blower" style cooling version of the 1080's, which is the version I prefer over the "open" style.
 
Auggie said:
Yep, they finally responded to my third e-mail regarding the 1080Ti, and within a day (I emailed them this past Tues). Never responded to my 2-3 month old e-mails inquiring about the 980's, but that's fine since my new target is the 1080.

In case anyone was wondering, they are currently selling the "blower" style cooling version of the 1080's, which is the version I prefer over the "open" style.
Click to expand...
[doublepost=1495255388][/doublepost]I got ripped off by MacVidCards on a GTX780SC reflash. I had good communication via emails with Chris up to the point I received my card back. The card came back with a thumbsize blue sticker on it that had a smaller pink dot with the numbers 136 on it. I installed the card back in my mac pro 4,1 but it never showed the boot screen on start up and the ROM version is the same as before. I tried to contact MacVidCards 4 times since with the last email stating that I am assuming that he is ripping me off. No replies what so ever. A real bummer actually!!!
 
Last edited:
flowrider said:
^^^^^Never heard of them ripping anyone off. Who's Christian?

Lou
Click to expand...
I looked back at the e-mails from MacVidCards and they are signed Chris not Christian, so memory miscue on me. I thought it was weird as well, as it is clear that they have many happy customers, but my graphics card never had the boot screen and they never replied back after multiple attempts by me to contact them.
 
How is your display connected? Kepler based GPUs won't show the boot screen on DP1.2 displays.
 
NeuromancerOverdrive said:
[doublepost=1495255388][/doublepost]I got ripped off by MacVidCards on a GTX780SC reflash. I had good communication via emails with Chris up to the point I received my card back. The card came back with a thumbsize blue sticker on it that had a smaller pink dot with the numbers 136 on it. I installed the card back in my mac pro 4,1 but it never showed the boot screen on start up and the ROM version is the same as before. I tried to contact MacVidCards 4 times since with the last email stating that I am assuming that he is ripping me off. No replies what so ever. A real bummer actually!!!
Click to expand...

IIRC the sticker and number is to ID the card as it goes through the flashing and testing stages, MVC mentioned it a couple times in this forum.

when you say the BootROM version is the same, do you mean it Just lists the PC boot ROM version and not the "MacVidCards" string? when emailing back did you send screen shots of this information? also when you go to PCI in system profiler does it error out or does it list the card properly?
 
Fl0r!an said:
I'm quite sure that the EFI driver which enables boot screens and sets up the IOReg injection is completely self-developed by MVC & netkas. Dumping such a ROM from his GPUs and selling this as their own is no different than selling a pirated copy of any other software.
Click to expand...

You have an interesting legal interpretation which is not applicable in any EU country and vast parts of the US (if not all, info incomplete for DC/AK/HI).

You cannot steal something that was unlicensed and non-approved modified from an original (either from Bin, or even worse, from stolen source code), in fact him selling the cards is already the same questionable level as dumping and flashing others with the ROM, then selling them - nothing changes in legality, which is currently just "accepted" by Nvidia/AMD and not in any way approved and especially not for profit.

As for AMD cards, the EFI they - like anyone else - used/use as base is stolen from a Mac edition card which is loss to that company, that law is fairly clear as well... profiting on costs of another company by stealing their work they actually licensed unlike him.... not very legal.


Might help you to figure out why he likes complaining about ebay/other sellers (which are partly, proven, not based on 'their' work either, different ports working and so on) but never actually goes to a lawyer or sues someone, regardless if US or EU - The other side can simply go to Nvidia and they would do interesting things to his business in a split second, even if he wins the case it will simply bankrupt them way before that happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bowmasters and Cisco_Kid
nVidia nor AMD copy write their Option Roms, likely because they are useless, unless someone plans to flash them to another nVidia/AMD card. It won't do anyone any good to flash a nVidia Rom to an AMD card or vice versa.

Every time someone flashes a Rom, that's a sale for nVidia/AMD. There is no reason to sue anyone over it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Synchro3
DearthnVader said:
nVidia nor AMD copy write their Option Roms, likely because they are useless, unless someone plans to flash them to another nVidia/AMD card. It won't do anyone any good to flash a nVidia Rom to an AMD card or vice versa.
Click to expand...

It's "copyright" and automatically granted if you write the code, unless you waive it explicitly, which neither does.

My point still stands - the EFI from an AMD Mac Edition card is lost sales for the manufacturer of this card, which is illegal.
 
William_si said:
It's "copyright" and automatically granted if you write the code, unless you waive it explicitly, which neither does.

My point still stands - the EFI from an AMD Mac Edition card is lost sales for the manufacturer of this card, which is illegal.
Click to expand...

Not sure how the law works in the EU, but I think it would still be hard to make a case against someone that modifies a video card rom, once you have sold them a card, without an accompanying copyright.

Also, my point still stands, it just doesn't add up for nVidia/AMD to start suing their customers. nVidia did the math a long time ago, as to what would garner them more sales, locking down their drivers to only work with "Mac Edition" OEM and retail products, or allowing virtually any nVidia card to work in a Mac.
 
Buying a card does not grant any right to the ROM, neither to modify it nor to use it for something else. Buying one Windows license does not grant you right to install it with a crack either.

NV did not do the math, they are just not really interested in OSX - you have seen how long 10xx web drivers took to appear, and Apple did send the source for the functions out years ago already, which AMD implemented the usual driver which was then fed back to Apple before release of 10.12. NV could do the same, they however choose not to.
 
vN
William_si said:
Buying a card does not grant any right to the ROM, neither to modify it nor to use it for something else. Buying one Windows license does not grant you right to install it with a crack either.

NV did not do the math, they are just not really interested in OSX - you have seen how long 10xx web drivers took to appear, and Apple did send the source for the functions out years ago already, which AMD implemented the usual driver which was then fed back to Apple before release of 10.12. NV could do the same, they however choose not to.
Click to expand...
nVidia chose to release drivers for 10xx, when they found they had a backlog of chips that weren't selling. Don't be naive, nVidia did not do it out of the kindness of their heart.

If you sell me a piece of hardware, with software on it, that does not contain an explicit copyright notice, I am free to modify or redistribute it in any way I see fit.
 
DearthnVader said:
If you sell me a piece of hardware, with software on it, that does not contain an explicit copyright notice, I am free to modify or redistribute it in any way I see fit.
Click to expand...

It will be in the documentation the hardware comes with. The sticker falling off or previous owner removing does not exempt from the law.
 
William_si said:
According to you they did not, as earlier driver = more sales = your answer makes no sense.
Click to expand...
nVidia, being kind souls, not a for profit enterprise, just said," you know what would be great, if we put our software engineers to writing drivers for a platform we won't make any money off of."

One of us is very naive.:p
 
William_si said:
You have an interesting legal interpretation which is not applicable in any EU country and vast parts of the US (if not all, info incomplete for DC/AK/HI).

You cannot steal something that was unlicensed and non-approved modified from an original (either from Bin, or even worse, from stolen source code), in fact him selling the cards is already the same questionable level as dumping and flashing others with the ROM, then selling them - nothing changes in legality, which is currently just "accepted" by Nvidia/AMD and not in any way approved and especially not for profit.
Click to expand...
I don't see why a EFI driver developed by netkas & MVC should be "unlicensed" or a "non-approved modification". It's a piece of software (sitting on a SPI flash), just like anything else. Also can't find any EULA on my Nvidia GPU box which prohibits any modifications. It'll void warranty, nothing else.

You're most likely right about the AMD ROMs, but that's not what I talked about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LightBulbFun, h9826790 and Synchro3
William_si said:
Buying a card does not grant any right to the ROM, neither to modify it nor to use it for something else.
Click to expand...

Tell me, in your interpretation does this also apply to the ECU of a motor vehicle? In the auto industry cracking and modifying the ECU of a car, motorcycle or truck is a big business.

Lou
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Synchro3 and h9826790
DearthnVader said:
If you sell me a piece of hardware, with software on it, that does not contain an explicit copyright notice, I am free to modify or redistribute it in any way I see fit.
Click to expand...

I am highly dubious of your understanding of copyright, given that in every other context, copyright is inherent to created works, functions as default-deny for redistribution without the copyright holder's permission, and does not require any sort of notice, registration, or mark in order to be enforced to the full extent of the laws of countries that are signatories to the Berne Convention.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back