Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.40] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 4747257 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 22:22:01 +0200 Received: from mtaout-mb04.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-mb04.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.68]) by imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q5EKOZgI012971 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 16:24:35 -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-mb04.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPSA id ED514E0000D0; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 16:24:34 -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=_827ADD32-D541-4699-9F10-1588E2A71244" From: Tim Sassoon In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:24:33 -0700 Cc: Tim Sassoon Message-Id: <920FD9AF-5587-4BBE-9792-26A454949D65@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=1339705475; bh=2yOkrNRTxnDVCNwEeXuQwTdxKv1cf+LIRcCV071dOQ8=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=gJNWe1RQKhnIerGVuZwxyuE3Utf7P7mVAXZRIYbrDGHwoqNvyMJc71nAPnBoSETv7 ayICzm8TpcXVEmxu2XsbMxIM5gF1TQv0NNGU81yaeVt//O+whjiCEzRN+/JAYf58jJ q1J/zJJjIzOam1u5pz8vLzOPzEZVm/4A1gxDDmbg= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:475155232:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d29444fda48821355 X-AOL-IP: 108.23.214.125 --Apple-Mail=_827ADD32-D541-4699-9F10-1588E2A71244 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 At NAB the NVidia rep told me that their #1 user request by far was for = a TB-attached CUDA engine/GPU. He said that the _current_ TB = implementation wasn't fast enough to make that as good a solution as = user would hope for. Tim Sassoon Sassoon Film Design 2525 Main Street Suite 206 Santa Monica, CA 90405 W 310.664.9115 M 310.266.8630 On Jun 14, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Tony Romain wrote: > That's kind of what I've been thinking too=85 just ditch everything in = the computer except for a souped up graphics card and processor. = Everything else is external and thunderbolt connected >=20 >=20 > -- > tony romain | principal/creative director >=20 > trance > motion graphic animation and design > 323 651 1114 > www.trancedesigns.com >=20 > From: Tim Sassoon > Reply-To: AE list > Date: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:58 PM > To: AE list > Subject: Re: [AE] [OT] The Mac Pro is dead >=20 > Okay, decade, schmeckade. And I know in all seriousness that you don't = have a million bucks :-) >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 >=20 > Tim Sassoon > SFD > Santa Monica, CA >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Jun 14, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Stephen van Vuuren wrote: >=20 >> > 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 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_827ADD32-D541-4699-9F10-1588E2A71244 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 At = NAB the NVidia rep told me that their #1 user request by far was for a = TB-attached CUDA engine/GPU. He said that the _current_ TB = implementation wasn't fast enough to make that as good a solution as = user would hope for.


Tim = Sassoon
Sassoon Film Design
2525 Main Street
Suite 206
Santa = Monica, CA 90405
W 310.664.9115
M 310.266.8630

On Jun 14, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Tony Romain wrote:

That's kind of = what I've been thinking too=85 just ditch everything in the computer = except for a souped up graphics card and processor.  Everything = else is external and thunderbolt = connected


--
tony = romain | = principal/creative director

trance
motion graphic animation = and design
323 651 = 1114

From: Tim Sassoon <tsassoon@aol.com>
Reply-To: AE list <AE-List@media-motion.tv>Date: Thursday, June 14, 2012 = 12:58 PM
To: AE list <AE-List@media-motion.tv>Subject: Re: [AE] [OT] The Mac = Pro is dead

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
 


<= /div>

= --Apple-Mail=_827ADD32-D541-4699-9F10-1588E2A71244--