You get logs on the Mac and plenty of diagnostic tools including dtrace. If the phone is broken you take it back to apple and they give you a new one, but there are diagnostic logs on that too that you can get off it.

Sounds like you're a typical nerd who gets asked to support apple gear and you're out of your depth, so just say "it's crap" because you don't understand it.

Check out samsung's model page for phones. Yes, sure; SOME are minor variations, but there's still a fuck-tonne of different chassis on there.

That's cute. Samsung can't manufacture like apple using slave labour either.

Whilst the iphone is pretty, what apple actually sells is a device you don't have to babysit, that does what it says on the box in a manner that is both attractive and pleasant to use.

The reason many people, myself included by apple gear is because I have spent the past 20 years babysitting computer shit because it half does what it says, needs care to use to ensure it doesn't get malware, etc. I'm fucking over it. I don't care about the theoretical reduced flexibility if the device does what I actually want it to do, and doesn't need babysitting.

Being pretty is a bonus, not the primary motivator.

... there's a reason apple don't make 35 different models of smartphone, 18 different laptop models, and 5 different lines of desktop (like other OEMs seem determined to do).

Because stamping out 100 million copies of a single model (e.g., iphone) is a LOT more cost effective than trying to tool up to stamp out 10 million copies each of 10 different models. Which means that they can increase their profit margin or increase feature set at the same price as they see fit.

You are aware that the write IOPS of your RAIDZ VDEV is the performance of a SINGLE DISK, right?

I ran a home ZFS box with 2 GB in it (1.5 TB of mirrored storage) for 6 months with zero issues using FreeNAS. It's now got 10 GB, for home media streaming use i have noticed basically zero difference. Saturated gig-e with both setups.

Bullshit. You can add different size VDEVs to a pool, it works fine. It auto balances load across them, and no partitioning is required. My current home setup is 2x1 TB and 2x 512 GB mirrors (soon to be replaced with bigger drives, when it is full).

Just accept that you need to add (or replace) disks 2 at a time (mirror VDEVs), and move on. Unless you're dealing with > 20-30 drives, I'd suggest that RAIDZn is a poor choice. Also, the way writes work, making massive raid groups with large numbers of drives in them (i.e., adding another drive to a RAID5, like you would with BTRFS) is a bad idea. Parity RAID In general is a bad idea. Capacity is cheap, performance is not. Parity raid sucks for performance.

Yup. Most people's expansion difficulties are due to retarded pool configurations. If you accept that 1. disk is cheap and 2. mirrors, whilst expensive in terms of disk capacity are way better performance and more flexible, zfs rocks.

People seem to have it stuck in their head that bigger RAID numbers are better, but RAIDZ/RAIDZ2/RAIDZ3 are only really useful when you're dealing with HUGE numbers of disks and performance is not so important. Normally you're far better off creating a larger number of VDEV mirrors, both in terms of performance and in terms of flexibility.

Which brings up another point - those not used to dealing with enterprise storage may not realize that you can/should/maybe want an array with more than one RAID group in it. They end up putting all their disks in one big VDEV which sucks for performance and flexibility, then blame ZFS for not being flexible.

Read how it works, don't make retarded choices based on ignorance, and you'll be fine.

Think about why you want to do that. Normally, it's due to fuck up from not setting your pool up in a sensible manner in the first place. Don't do that.

1 GB of RAM is worth about $20 these days anyhow (less?).

And yes, de-dup is expensive. Most of the time in my experience you get far better benefits from compression anyhow (source: real world enterprise datasets at work).

CPU and RAM overhead is not "required". If you want to do things like in-line de-dupe, sure. If you use retarded ways of setting up your pools, then sure, expandability sucks.

The rules aren't "wierd", they are just different. The big mistake people make with ZFS is diving into it without reading any of the documentation on the assumption that they know what they're doing because they've used other filesystems before.

Don't do that. Have run ZFS for years, it's awesome.

You know you can lay a zfs filesystem on files, right?

The bit about the Apple Watch GPS being able to tap you differently for left or right is genius. I ride a motorcycle. I have enough to look out for without being glued to a GPS. Left/right haptic feedback to indicate direction on a watch will be awesome.