Return-Path: Received: from imr-db03.mx.aol.com ([205.188.91.97] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 4747226 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 21:56:29 +0200 Received: from mtaout-db06.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-db06.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.51.198]) by imr-db03.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q5EJwsZq015759; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 15:58:54 -0400 Received: from lunette.home (pool-108-23-214-125.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [108.23.214.125]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mtaout-db06.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPSA id E0A1BE00013E; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 15:58:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [AE] [OT] The Mac Pro is dead Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B6C4E57A-1269-498B-8036-A9B0F7CA404D" From: Tim Sassoon In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:58:51 -0700 Cc: Tim Sassoon Message-Id: <1BF1264F-D20A-41F4-A579-D7A19CB83AA1@aol.com> References: To: "After Effects Mail List" , X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20110426; t=1339703934; bh=3nW7X3IYCD1LFCMtzlGI9kYqAikPC0Ysh6z7XXPgtm0=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=u8pcyWCkcPewhgJbSKAwch0hvGyowjtiEOE17+Rypfd71ykvU1BxuOLlTaZFmgs/t T+cAwWEPm20ExSqEcaMQbVzStpz75l6uUtnG8qcswixRvGTA8yY1Xsn+l+oQfAS7mt ioNBR6/cCqA0N4qCJSOcW25x3Tq7Dw0wX4P74eKM= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:406539872:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33c64fda427c4ea7 X-AOL-IP: 108.23.214.125 --Apple-Mail=_B6C4E57A-1269-498B-8036-A9B0F7CA404D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Okay, decade, schmeckade. And I know in all seriousness that you don't = have a million bucks :-) But computing power generally has an inverse proportion to size. In = order to become more powerful, they must shrink. Then there's Quantum = Computing, where suddenly the current chip paradigm looks like tubes and = punch cards compared. Most of the space in a current tower are disk and peripheral bays, PCI = slots, and power supply. Disks will be SSD, and peripherals can be = outboard, Thunderbolt can supplant internal PCI, and then you only need = a fraction of the power supply. What do you have then? A Mac Mini with = better CPU's, pretty much. And I suspect that in the long run, that's = Apple's point. That instead of buying one Monster Truck of a computer, = you'd be better served by buying a fleet of FIT's. Tim Sassoon SFD Santa Monica, CA On Jun 14, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Stephen van Vuuren wrote: > > The "pro" computer ten years from now will be the same size as = today's iPhone. >=20 > I will bet a million dollars, in all seriousness, in front of all the = witnesses here, that this is not the case. Physics says no as does = Moore=92s law and what we will be doing with said computers in ten = years. >=20 > I will agree the iPhone of ten years from now will outperform todays = tower. But I am sure enough to bet a million dollars that pro=92s will = need far more power than that. The iPhone today much slower than the pro = CPU in 2002. And the pro CPUs 10 years ago can=92t run any recent = version of CS6 (which requires Core 2 Duo minimum). > =20 > Unless you are hoping some massive revolution in = chip/CPU/drive/RAM/storage, I think my best is pretty safe. > =20 > Plus, my towers have been getting bigger over the last 10 years, not = smaller=85 > =20 > stephen van vuuren > 336.202.4777 > =20 > http://www.sv2dcp.com/ > http://www.sv2studios.com/ > http://www.outsideinthemovie.com/ > =20 > A film is =96 or should be =96 more like music than like fiction. It = should be a progression of moods and feelings. The theme, what=92s = behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later. > =96Stanley Kubrick --Apple-Mail=_B6C4E57A-1269-498B-8036-A9B0F7CA404D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Okay, decade, schmeckade. And I know in all = seriousness that you don't have a million bucks = :-)

But computing power generally has an inverse = proportion to size. In order to become more powerful, they must shrink. = Then there's Quantum Computing, where suddenly the current chip paradigm = looks like tubes and punch cards compared.

Most = of the space in a current tower are disk and peripheral bays, PCI slots, = and power supply. Disks will be SSD, and peripherals can be outboard, = Thunderbolt can supplant internal PCI, and then you only need a fraction = of the power supply. What do you have then? A Mac Mini with better = CPU's, pretty much. And I suspect that in the long run, that's Apple's = point. That instead of buying one Monster Truck of a computer, you'd be = better served by buying a fleet of FIT's.


Tim = Sassoon
SFD
Santa Monica, = CA



On Jun 14, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Stephen van Vuuren = wrote:

> The "pro" computer ten = years from now will be the same size as today's iPhone.

I will bet a million dollars, in all = seriousness, in front  of all the witnesses here, that this is not = the case. Physics says no as does Moore=92s law and what we will be = doing with said computers in ten years.

I will agree the iPhone of = ten years from now will outperform todays tower. But I am sure enough to = bet a million dollars that pro=92s will need far more power than that. = The iPhone today much slower than the pro CPU in 2002. And the pro CPUs = 10 years ago can=92t run any recent version of CS6 (which requires Core = 2 Duo minimum).
 
Unless you are hoping some = massive revolution in chip/CPU/drive/RAM/storage, I think my best is = pretty safe.
 
Plus, my towers have been getting = bigger over the last 10 years, not smaller=85
stephen van vuuren
 


<= /div>
= --Apple-Mail=_B6C4E57A-1269-498B-8036-A9B0F7CA404D--