But for us, whose entire income comes from photography, we need to nit pick the options our manufacturer offers us as it can influence our work... So yes some of us may be "Armchair Spec Readers" but that is because our lively hood depends on the tools we use everyday.
If you're a pro, why would you even be looking at the 6D? Don't get me wrong, I think the 1/180th kinda sucks for amateur strobists. But, someone who makes their livelihood from photography probably shouldn't be looking at "entry-level" FF cameras, right? Canon's not marketing this camera to or making it for pros, they're doing it for enthusiasts with lots of spare cash. The 1D's, the 5D's, and the 7D are the pro tools. If I made my living off photography, I wouldn't trust any other Canon DSLRs to be my main tool.
Thats exactly the problem. This camera is a Pro model, but it sounds like canon is dumbing and watering down the Pro bloodline. And being that our entire living comes from these tools it is imperative that we keep tabs on the new technology even if it isn't the tool for us. It is also good for those of us who use these tools full time as well as all of the part-timers and hobbyists to discuss these tools for our own understanding as well as for the advancement of the products.
We all know that this sync speed and max shutter are not physical limitations but rather Canon introduced limits to separate the 6D from the 5d3. All while making FF affordable to the world minus the AF limits and other assorted suck with this camera. It worries me that cheapening the FF cameras will only make the Professional Photogs life much harder as anyone can now afford a pro camera. The hard part for us will be distinguishing ourselves from the people who have the tools but don't have the foggiest idea how they can really be used to capture so many great moments in time.
I disagree that Canon considers this a true "pro" camera. In the press release for the 6D, they call it a "mid-range" camera "designed for advanced amateurs." Yes, the release talks about pro-quality features, but that's likely mostly just marketing--trying to encourage enthusiasts and semi-pros to step up to a more expensive camera. And, considering how much disdain pros have for the 6D already, it's kinda contradictory to claim that the 6D is a "pro model" while at the same time saying that it is totally insufficient for pros.
Regardless, your argument about the 6D making life harder for pros is absurd on its face. If some newb can make better photos on a 6D than you, the Professional Photog, can make on a 5D3, then you're doing something wrong, not Canon. If you can't distinguish your work from people with a 6D who "don't have the foggiest idea" how to use it, what does that say about your skills as a pro?
Look, I'm not trying to start a flame war or put you down in any way. Obviously, pros needs to keep up on the newest gear to know what tools are available to them for their profession. And, the 6D probably isn't an ideal tool for many pros. But that doesn't mean the 6D is a bad camera. For Canon users, it has significantly lowered the cost of moving into the FF world. And Canon has created the smallest and lightest FF ever (which might appeal to some landscape photogs), and that ain't nothing.
Just like how for some folks the 7D is/was a better choice than the 5D2, the 6D is gonna be good for some and not for others. If you do strobist, the 6D (and Canons generally) isn't your best bet because of the flash sync. And, going back to the OP's original question, if I was a big strobist enthusiast hoping to upgrade from my Canon crop sensor to a Canon FF, yeah, I'd probably be pissed.