Only an idiot holds back physical inventory when they can sell it easily.

Apple doesn't need more press or hype; it already has those. They simply sell as many units as they can make.

If your "theory" is correct, then why do shipping times gradually get longer as more orders are made? If your "theory" is correct, why would the 6Plus ship a week after the 6 even for the earliest adopters?

Whatever happened to the belief that the simplest answer is usually true...

The Apple Store app started working well before the website did, say 30 minutes after the supposed launch...

The early parts of selection worked fine, it was when you chose a carrier that things timed out.

Once the website came up (about two and a half hours late) it was pretty speedy.

So it was something around the carrier gateway that was the issue.

The interesting aspect of that, was that people had no issue ordering from carriers directly that supported it (Verizon and AT&T were the two I knew people ordered from shortly after midnight Pacific)

When you are about to have an economic crash groups like Occupy and the Tea Party are an inevitability, whatever the names or politcal leaning may be. When you are about to have an economic crash the powers that be prepare to suppress revolt and domestic spying is job one. Militarizing the police is job two.

During the Great Depression Fascism was where economically desperate people turned as they are doing in Greece today.

Note the date, 2008, not 2002. Approximately the time financial markets started crashing and the Occupy and Tea Party movements started building. Ya think the U.S. government was more worried about Islamic terrorists or ordinary Americans who would soon be fed up with massive corruption in D.C. and Wall Street. Were they trying to prevent another 9/11 or building the capacity to suppress the backlash when millions of ordinary people would soon be thrown out of their jobs and homes, while Wall Street would get massively bailed out, and return to business as usual, getting rich.

The U.S. did a spectacularly good job of crushing Occupy. Did they use domestic spying to do it.

War is when your government tells you who the enemy is, revolution is when you figure it out for yourself.

You don't know Microsoft very well, then. They've literally never done anything else!

1) They were late to the party with DOS. They ripped off QDOS and sold it to IBM. It was IBM who launched Microsoft, it was Microsoft's non-exclusive contract with IBM that allowed the IBM compatible market to begin. That had never been done before, and only happened because IBM didn't take the microcomputer seriously.

2) They were late to the party for GUI. Windows was quickly thrown together after trying to work together with IBM and deciding to be dicks to IBM and steal lots of their design work.

3) Windows '95 was a rebrand of "Windows". So was Windows CE ME NT, XP, Vista, Mobile, and RT. In a sense, Windows 7 is the first "debranding" of Windows back to its marketing roots.

4) Microsoft goes through a major change in structure every 2-5 years. It's always made the tech rags, all the way back to the 1980s.

5) Their now dominant office was a rebrand of their MS Word, Excel, and Power Point, which were sold separately.

6) Each of these Office products was a late comer in its field, in part winning due to strange incompatibilities encountered by the "other guys". Remember the phrase "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run". Lotus 123 was the leading spreadsheet at the time.

and so on.... Just don't pretend that this BS is anything *new*. Market conditions were right, and MS had a combination of luck and determination to make the best of it. The market conditions have changed remarkably.

Except now when you try that MLC gets an email saying someone is requesting her password to be recovered, and can just change it.

That is the only reason why last year I went to the 5S. I was thinking Apple would let apps use it as an authentication tool.

iOS8 provides for exactly that.

Scrubbing doesn't thrash your CPU as much as it thrashes I/O. Remember that both I/O and CPU are part of your "load average". This would be expected; it's reading every block on every device in your system.

You're right about the memory; I've forgotten that detail since RAM is cheap. 1 GB per TB is the recommended amount, though I've worked with far less in practice in low/medium write load environments.

The last link (about spoofing device identification) is really just a generic warning about man in the middle attacks.

Are there published ways to use a man-in-the-middle against iCloud?

Also normally the backups only activate when the device is plugged in...

There are so many pros for ZFS that I don't even. Until you try it, you won't "get it" - it's more like trying to describe purple to a life long blind guy. But, I'd adjust your list to at least include:

Pros:
- Data integrity
- Effortless handling of failure scenarios (RAIDZ makes normal RAID look like a child's crayon drawing)
- Snapshots.
- Replication. Imagine being able to DD a drive partition without taking it offline, and with perfect data integrity.
- Clones. Imagine being able to remount an rsync backup from last tuesday, and make changes to it, in seconds, without affecting your backup?
- Scrub. Do an fsck mid-day without affecting any end users. Not only "fix" errors, but actually guarantee the accuracy of the "fix" so that no data is lost or corrupted.
- Expandable. Add capacity at any time with no downtime. Replace every disk in your array with no downtime, and it can automatically use the extra space.
- Redundancy, even on a single device! Can't provide multiple disks, but want to defend against having a block failure corrupting your data?
- Flexible. Imagine having several partitions in your array, and be able to resize them at any time. In seconds. Or, don't bother to specify a size and have each partition use whatever space they need.
- Native compression. Double your disk space, while (sometimes) improving performance! We compressed our database backup filesystem and not only do we see some 70% reduction in disk space usage, we saw a net reduction in system load as IO overhead was significantly reduced.
- Sharp cost savings. ZFS obviates the need for exotic RAID hardware to do all the above. It brings back the "Inexpensive" in RAID. (Remember: "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks"?)

Cons:
- CPU and RAM overhead comparable to Software RAID 5.
- Requires you to be competent and know how it operates, particularly when adding capacity to an existing pool.
- ECC RAM strongly recommended if using scrub.
- Strongly recommended for data partitions, YMMV for native O/S partitions. (EG: /)

Maybe, but crimes committed under the age of 21 are dragged up in the Criminal Records Check even when you are in your 60's and have to be explained away on a regular basis if you want your job even with no military connection.

Bad combo - giant solar flare just as the internet itself explodes with iPhone 6 pre-orders.

You may as well just crawl in a cave that day and see what is left of society when you come out. Hint; take some Twinkies as our soon-to-be cockroach overlords love them.

Though even in the smartphone area they are waning in popularity which was inevitable

Well, except for the fact the are waxing instead...

I wonder if releasing lager phones which have been popular, will increase or decrease iPhone sales? HMMMMMMM.