This is not a "Pro" machine.

[-hh]

... and that's the business he's in.

Personally I see all of his arguments as an attempt to secure and maintain his business.

Unfortunately, it appears that that's all that you want to see.

I've not noticed if MVC has ever taken the extraorinarily unnessary additional step to disclose exactly how much his side business makes, but he has made it clear that it is a minor sideline to his day job ... my personal interpretation is that its probably <10%, which would mean that he's probably under the "Hobby which happens to make some money" IRS tax provisions...here's the specific IRS guidance, and note carefully the criteria for bullet#2...this "depend on" term effectively means that the total revenue has to be good enough to represent a significant percentage of one's earnings in order to get above the "Only a Hobby" threshhold...in plain english "Not A Real Business" per IRS.

And before someone rags on me for flaming MVC or his business this is not my intention.

Unfortunately, actions speak louder than words. Reading posts filled with misrepresenations, borderline insults, unsubstantiated allegations, false claims, etc...again and again and again...has lost the plausibility of general indifference, but is quite clearly nothing less than intentional targeting...and in the TOS, "Harassment" is an actionable offense.

I would probably do the same thing in his shoes. It's called self-preservation and we all do it - it's human.

Sorry, but "Preservation" claims don't cut it when it is known to be a minor part of one's fiscal well-being. This is YA example where this dialog has gone well beyond being merely unprofessional or rude: it is a clearly deceptive claim purposefully made with malicious and slanderous intent which has utterly no place on MR.

At the same time however it's only fair play for those who see through the games to lay it out in the open for others to see.

Trying to invoke the principles of 'fair play' is a two way street...

From an ethics standpoint, MVC has already disclosed his potential conflict of interest as a vendor.

To then try to beat up on someone for having made their disclosure is ... anything but ethical behavior.



-hh

 

[handsome pete]

I haven't paid much attention to the Mac Pro discussions since the announcement but do we know that there won't be a single GPU model?

I suppose no one can confirm it with absolute 100% certainty. But when the product page reads "dual GPUs standard," I'd be more than willing to wager money that a single GPU model won't be an option.

 

[flat five]

Unfortunately, it appears that that's all that you want to see.

not really.. it's just kinda hard to ignore.
there's no slander going on here.. there's no digging up dirt.. it's all laid out right before you.

click on that vendor badge.. follow the vender link.. view amount of customers (4000+).. view amount of years in business (5).. view average cost of goods ($300?).. do math = $240k/yr.

that is all perfectly acceptable consumer research.. doing that is definitely not against any forum TOS.. in fact, that type of behavior is highly recommend/encouraged around here by the site mgmt itself (buying guides.. cost comparisons.. etc)

if that's his hobby side business and he has no worries about it drying up then good for him i guess.. but most people are going to assume that he'd rather not have that source of income go away.. if anything, making that assumption is the only part in the whole deal that could be viewed as malicious/unethical (even though it's not)

 

[hudson1]

I suppose no one can confirm it with absolute 100% certainty. But when the product page reads "dual GPUs standard," I'd be more than willing to wager money that a single GPU model won't be an option.

I agree... that seems like a pretty clear statement from Apple. Thanks.

 

[handsome pete]

do math = $240k/yr.

I understand how one could question his objectivity with respect to the new Mac Pro, but that math is pointless without knowing what percentage of that is profit (not to mention inaccurate without actual sales figures).

 

[tuxon86]

I understand how one could question his objectivity with respect to the new Mac Pro, but that math is pointless without knowing what percentage of that is profit (not to mention inaccurate without actual sales figures).

And in any case, not of anyone business.

Over the period of time he has been doing this and advertise on the internet, if some one has found such action objectionnable they would have sent him a c&d letter or sued him already.

I guess at the end of the day, it's just TESS and FF not being able to attack the message and turning against the messenger type of thing. Typical trollish behavior...

 

[flat five]

I understand how one could question his objectivity with respect to the new Mac Pro, but that math is pointless without knowing what percentage of that is profit (not to mention inaccurate without actual sales figures).

it doesn't have to be accurate.. we're consumers. we guess at this stuff and companies usually try to present a positive image of themselves in order to sway our guesses..

every single person on these boards does exactly the same thing towards apple and all these other products being discussed.. why can't we do the same thing towards a gpu vendor?

----------

Typical trollish behavior...

i'm sorry but it's not trolling.. just pointing out the obvious is all.
just a bit crazy how selectively you can be in what's obvious- rant on apple all day long because they don't care about you and all the want is your money.. well, guess what.. mvc wants your money too

 

[handsome pete]

every single person on these boards does exactly the same thing towards apple and all these other products being discussed.. why can't we do the same thing towards a gpu vendor?

Of course you have every right to do so. Just pointing out that the math you were touting is meaningless without any qualifying info.

 

[freejazz-man]

MVC posts some of the most nonsensical vitriolic junk at people that don't seem to agree that the mac pro needs to be a 16 slot PCIe3.0 breakout box. That fact alone shares so much for his chosen 'side business' that I don't think revenue vs. profit matters.

The guy has his perspective and if you didn't know that he had a professional fetish with regards to how many video cards and SATA devices he can stuff in the mac pro you might actually be tempted to take him seriously.

 

[haravikk]

I haven't paid much attention to the Mac Pro discussions since the announcement but do we know that there won't be a single GPU model?

I suppose it's still a possibility; even better would be if you can could choose a few other arrangements as well, so you could have two CPUs and one GPU, but I dunno how likely that's going to be.

If such an arrangement were possible, or if you could only have a single GPU if you wanted then I would have expected it to be noted in some form on the Mac Pro page, e.g - "Up to two GPUs". Of course that's only speculation, being able to have a single CPU, single GPU setup would be the easiest thing for Apple to offer as a semi-affordable low end, but we'll just have to wait and see.

Like I say, what little we have pushes the two GPUs thing, but I hope I'm wrong as I really would like to upgrade

 

[GSPice]

I can't understand why Apple is calling a non-expandable, no disc drive machine a "Pro" machine.

"Pro's", aka Professionals, do NOT want external expansion boxes cluttering their desk just because Apple deems it necessary to not allow people to expand it's internal components. ("expansion is external")

Professional users also want to burn media (videos, photos, etc) to DVDs and Blu Rays. Now, on top of a ~$3000+ machine, they have to purchase an additional external drive just to do that. Apple is not gonna undercut the price of the high end ridiculously priced 15" rMBP. ($2799)

Don't get me started on the internal storage. WHY can Pros NOT expand the internal storage? Yes, there are external drives, but when it comes down to it, it's yet ANOTHER external expansion box, cluttering an already cluttered desk.

lol

 

[Tesselator]

my personal interpretation is that its probably <10%,

Personal interpretation matters little in the face of the facts. All you need to do is go look at his e-bay page. It says he has sold around 5,000 cards just since Oct-21-2009 and he's been an actively selling member under other names since Jul-09-2000. That's somewhere between $10K and $50K a year (profit) on the LOW end, over less than just the past 4 years and that doesn't count any of the other sites he's on or deals he's arranged through PM on forums like here. I would totally defend a business like that, anyone would.

Sorry, you may think I'm out to get him, you may think a lot of other incorrect things which just aren't the case. He has a major dog in the race and his postings show it very clearly to me. Even if I'm completely wrong I think it's only normal, fair, and gentlemanly to bring the issue out in the open so others can consider the same facts when joining one or another's bash-wagon or making up their minds whether or not to drop 3 to $4k on a new system.

I am honestly sorry if you feel like I'm hating on your good buddy but that's not the issue here as all.

I suppose no one can confirm it with absolute 100% certainty. But when the product page reads "dual GPUs standard," I'd be more than willing to wager money that a single GPU model won't be an option.

Agreed. This seems fairly certain to me as well. Of course we'll all find out for sure in just a five or six months.

 

[wonderspark]

what's funny is that all 6 of those are good reasons. (at least upon first read).. i guess you should come up with a cons list as well as an aesthetics decision and who knows.. you might actually end up with an mp bolted to the bottom of your desk.. (though i'm willing to guess the aesthetic choice will prevent it from happening.. that's why your post was in jest to begin with)

My post was serious, but you and Tess appear to look down on anyone that disagrees with you, so go on high-fiving each other.

I see what you guys are saying - - that only an idiot would work on a self-contained system, and real geniuses pay for an online render farm.

I've not used an online render farm before, so I can't really debate how that would work for me. I don't know how long it takes to send and receive a job versus rendering my work locally.

If they do come back in five minutes, and that's say twice as fast as my local render would be, I don't know how much money I'd be paying out over five years to have these jobs rendered for me online versus buying the equipment I need for a five year+ lifespan to make my workflow smooth locally.

With your method, if I'm working on a project where there is no internet (or it's just spotty and unreliable, as has been the case for me in Brighton, UK) then I guess I'm screwed, and can't make money until I go to an internet café, where I pay both wifi time and render time, and hope it doesn't eat into my budget too much right?

If that's how you are working, then I can see why you think the nMP is a perfect fit, and I'd agree for the workflows both of you are using.

For my work, I'd 'only' need a nMP, my Areca RAID card in some sort of TB external box, a new massive minimum of 12-bay RAID box to hold my currently active drives, and reliable high speed internet... plus a render farm budget. See, I still have many terabytes of data (usually about 8TB) to move around at all times, and it all has to be fast and local for smooth playback. Some projects are simple, others are not, and I often have five going at once. I appreciate that you've provided a different workflow for doing some sort of 3D modeling animation work, but I don't do that kind of work yet. Maybe I will some day, and I'll consider paying for render farms at that time.

I wish the future-future nMP 7,1 will have four fast (800+MB/sec) internal flash volumes, three of which are at least 6TB in size. That's all I would need, and they could drop all the Thunderbolt ports for all I care.

 

[flat five]

I see what you guys are saying - - that only an idiot would work on a self-contained system, and real geniuses pay for an online render farm.

huh? i render things all the time (at least once a week.. sometimes 15 a week).. i've never used a renderfarm service.. i could do that many images in a week on my laptop if necessary..

If they do come back in five minutes, and that's say twice as fast as my local render would be, I don't know how much money I'd be paying out over five years to have these jobs rendered for me online versus buying the equipment I need for a five year+ lifespan to make my workflow smooth locally.

well, it's more like they will come back 500x as fast.. not twice..

so if you're pumping out a few hundred renders or so per week, you might want to consider a render service.. or build/buy your own.

With your method, if I'm working on a project where there is no internet (or it's just spotty and unreliable, as has been the case for me in Brighton, UK) then I guess I'm screwed, and can't make money until I go to an internet café, where I pay both wifi time and render time, and hope it doesn't eat into my budget too much right?

with my method? no need for internet

If that's how you are working, then I can see why you think the nMP is a perfect fit, and I'd agree for the workflows both of you are using.

again.. it's nice that you're at least trying to understand what i'm saying but i'm pretty sure you've completely missed something along the way.. because that's not how i am working..

For my work, I'd 'only' need a nMP, my Areca RAID card in some sort of TB external box, a new massive minimum of 12-bay RAID box to hold my currently active drives, and reliable high speed internet... plus a render farm budget. See, I still have many terabytes of data (usually about 8TB) to move around at all times, and it all has to be fast and local for smooth playback. Some projects are simple, others are not, and I often have five going at once. I appreciate that you've provided a different workflow for doing some sort of 3D modeling animation work, but I don't do that kind of work yet. Maybe I will some day, and I'll consider paying for render farms at that time.

are there computers available that you actually need and will suit they way you'd like to arrange stuff? because it sounds very much like there are.. in fact, you talk as if you already own one.. why not just use that one?

or are you upset that every single computer available is not custom tailored to your desires? i mean, i really don't think i understand what your point is.. unless you're simply saying you don't like the new mac.. is that it?

I wish the future-future nMP 7,1 will have four fast (800+MB/sec) internal flash volumes, three of which are at least 6TB in size. That's all I would need, and they could drop all the Thunderbolt ports for all I care.

i don't.. and if it were, i wouldn't buy it.. that would be a huge waste of money for me so i'd have to seek out alternatives..

 

[wonderspark]

I'm not angry at all... why do you keep saying that I am?

I'm glad we solved the debate. The new Mac Pro isn't built for everyone.

But I'm curious, if you say building it with internal storage and no thunderbolt would force you to look elsewhere, and you also say thunderbolt would not have bottlenecks, and it still had the four USB3 ports, which are supposed to be as fast as TB1 in 2014... why wouldn't it fit your needs? Is it just that you'd not want the internal storage? If that's the only reason, you'd just leave those boxes blank when you're ordering it, and it would come cheaper without the internal storage. (In fact, even cheaper than with six TB2 ports.) Since the newer USB3 at 10Gb won't be a bottleneck, it would be the same, just cheaper and more ubiquitous, so what else have I missed?

 

[flat five]

I'm not angry at all... why do you keep saying that I am?

?? i asked you if you were upset

I'm glad we solved the debate. The new Mac Pro isn't built for everyone.

But I'm curious, if you say building it with internal storage an no thunderbolt would force you to look elsewhere, and you also say thunderbolt would not have bottlenecks, and it still had the four USB3 ports, which are supposed to be as fast as TB1 in 2014... why wouldn't it fit your needs?

hmm.. thunderbolt didn't even enter into the equation (remember before i told you i don't care about thunderbolt-- i really meant it)

i looked no further than the 18TB flash storage and made a decision on that alone..

Is it just that you'd not want the internal storage? If that's the only reason, you'd just leave those boxes blank when you're ordering it, and it would come without the internal storage. Since the newer USB3 at 10Gb won't be a bottleneck, it would be the same, just cheaper and more ubiquitous, so what else have I missed?

i don't want -or- not want the internal storage.. if the new mac used the old form, it's not like i'd be sitting around complaining about internal hard drives..
but, now that i have seen the new form factor, i realize it makes more sense to keep anything except the necessities outside the computer.. it's more efficient uses of materials and nobody (or less) is paying for things they don't need.. i have no qualms with keeping backup and old projects outside of the box though..
with a laptop, i still prefer the design which keeps two externals on board (the display and backup drive).. not really sure how i'll feel about it when the mbp shrinks to the point to where it can't accommodate a second drive.. hopefully it won't be so major that i will no longer be able to use mac laptops.. but i doubt that will be the case.. just like the lack of internal drives in the new mac is such a minor issue in the big picture even though some of you all love to blow it so far out of proportion..

anyway call me a koolaid drinker but my current mp already looks old fashioned.

 

[Jynto]

I think Apple will start selling a cylindrical hard drive caddy that's designed to stack under the Mac Pro.

 

[wonderspark]

?? i asked you if you were upset

I'm neither upset, nor angry, so why do you ask if I'm upset?

hmm.. thunderbolt didn't even enter into the equation (remember before i told you i don't care about thunderbolt-- i really meant it)

i looked no further than the 18TB flash storage and made a decision on that alone..

So if Apple gave an option to add internal storage, but otherwise left it out and kept the price the same, you'd have to seek out alternatives to the nMP. What is the reason for this?

i don't want -or- not want the internal storage.. if the new mac used the old form, it's not like i'd be sitting around complaining about internal hard drives..
but, now that i have seen the new form factor, i realize it makes more sense to keep anything except the necessities outside the computer.. it's more efficient uses of materials and nobody (or less) is paying for things they don't need.. i have no qualms with keeping backup and old projects outside of the box though..
with a laptop, i still prefer the design which keeps two externals on board (the display and backup drive).. not really sure how i'll feel about it when the mbp shrinks to the point to where it can't accommodate a second drive.. hopefully it won't be so major that i will no longer be able to use mac laptops.. but i doubt that will be the case.. just like the lack of internal drives in the new mac is such a minor issue in the big picture even though some of you all love to blow it so far out of proportion..

anyway call me a koolaid drinker but my current mp already looks old fashioned.

You've blown having internal storage out of proportion, saying you'd have to seek out alternatives if Apple included an option for three more sticks of flash... unless you're saying that you assumed that I suggested they all come with 18TB of internal storage as standard. That would be silly.

A more efficient use of materials, and not paying for things we don't need means that both of us should keep using what we currently have, since buying a new Mac Pro is a waste when you already have tools that work well when used properly... we both only need one CPU, and we can render locally or online if needed. Problem solved! No more wasting money on things we don't need.

It's all about working smarter, and I'm glad you finally see that.

I don't believe I've called you any names, and I don't plan to start now. I never liked Kool-Aid anyway... too much sugar in my opinion.

 

[flat five]

I'm neither upset, nor angry, so why do you ask if I'm upset?

because i was wondering if you were.. i didn't call you angry (or upset) as you say up there #

So if Apple gave an option to add internal storage, but otherwise left it out and kept the price the same, you'd have to seek out alternatives to the nMP. What is the reason for this?

i think you'd be better off if you just had conversations with yourself..

you realize you're telling me what i think and what i say (none of which are accurate) then ask me questions about why i think or say these things?

----------

unless you're saying that you assumed that i suggested they all come with 18tb of internal storage as standard. That would be silly.

#

i wish the future-future nmp 7,1 will have four fast (800+mb/sec) internal flash volumes, three of which are at least 6tb in size.

 

[wonderspark]

i think you'd be better off if you just had conversations with yourself..

you realize you're telling me what i think and what i say (none of which are accurate) then ask me questions about why i think or say these things?

The option, obviously... not standard. Anyway, I'm glad we agree on everything. Thanks for the great conversation.

 

[flat five]

thanks for the great conversation.

#

 

[throAU]

I suppose no one can confirm it with absolute 100% certainty. But when the product page reads "dual GPUs standard," I'd be more than willing to wager money that a single GPU model won't be an option.

It's called a retina macbook pro

 

[clamnectar]

just checking in.... yep, still the worst thread on the internet.

 

[flat five]

just checking in.... yep, still the worst thread on the internet.

hmm. you must of missed the 2&3rd (biased) funniest jokes in the thread i take it..

nah.. but there are a few Mohels in the neighborhood.. i bet they have some laying around.

ahh.. yes. capitalization.. the difference between me helping my Uncle Jack off a horse and helping my uncle jack off a horse.

thank you, thank you. i've been here all week.

 

[thekev]

I haven't paid much attention to the Mac Pro discussions since the announcement but do we know that there won't be a single GPU model?

We haven't gained any new information since the preview. They had a lot of "up to" qualifiers, but it's not possible to determine the exact lineup. The configuration shown had 3 thunderbolt chips routed across 2 cards. If there is a single gpu model, they would probably have to change that. In any case the preview suggested single cpu only, as it used 12 cores on one chip. If they were going to use dual chips, the single variants wouldn't go past what could be provided by E5-1600 chips similar to what we have now.