To me, I don't see anything interesting about the 6 and 6+ that would make it worth jumping from an iPhone 5S or even an iPhone 5.
MUCH BETTER BATTERY LIFE = 6+ battery is over twice as large as iPhone 5s battery, from 1,440 mAh to 2,915 mAh. While some might say "battery life will be the same because of the larger screen" it's been shown in iPad's that is not true, devices like the Mini have an enormous battery life despite the 8" screen and only a 4,490 mAh battery. If the 6+ can get just half the battery life of the Mini that will be a huge improvement from the battery life of the 5s. Apple is already reporting the 6+ will provide several hours more battery life than the 5s.
LARGER SCREEN = no dispute there
FINGERPRINT = 5s had fingerprint but 5 did not. That will make it much easier to unlock the phone and make iTunes payments
NFC = if mobile payments work out like they're saying this could be the best feature of the iPhone 6. It could mean never needing to get out your wallet and never having to worry about your credit card or identity stolen.
OPTICAL IMAGE STABILIZATION = would help a lot when recording videos, optical image stabilization is usually much better than digital stabilization.
BETTER CAMERA = anyone that has bought a cheap camera knows big megapixel numbers do not mean a good camera. The iPhone 6 is still "only" 8 megapixels but adds a new iSight sensor and Focus Pixels technology for focusing faster.
MOTION CO-PROCESSOR = anyone that uses their phone while working out would like this. The A8 chip includes the new M8 motion co-processor which recognizes data from gyroscopes, accelerometers and compasses.
The solution is simple: load them up with tranquilizers/sedatives and stack 'em in like cordwood.
A seemingly good idea that will fall apart as soon as someone overdoses on sedatives and their next-of-kin sue. Good luck with persuading a judge that some getout clause in a 3pt font prevents any liability attaching...
You're confusing the cost of legitimate operations with the cost of searching the key space. You don't want legit users to bear too much cost since everyone ends up paying that over and over, but you do want the cost of searching to be high since that's not something that people should be doing.
The trek itself was trivial compared to summiting Everest but the visuals were just a lot more impressive.
You don't need such fancy protective gear when doing Everest, which is just cold and lacking in oxygen, not outright chemically hostile and hot as hell. (Some volcanoes are even worse. The ones that spew fluorine gas (or hydrofluoric acid) are just awful...)
It's called JPEG2000, uses wavelet transformations instead of discrete cosine transformations that JPEG uses and has been around since over a decade ago. No one uses it.
You're wrong there. It's used quite a lot in high-capacity digital image storage. Libraries, that sort of thing. You might have the space and time to waste on using standard JPEG and you might not care too much about the compression artefacts, but libraries really do care. (A billion high-resolution images is only a medium-sized library...)
Is d) going to be "Profit!"?
How about if could charge your car wireleslly a bit at a time at each stop light.
If you think that's viable, you're spending too much of your life waiting at stop lights.
"More software projects have gone awry for lack of calendar time than for all other causes combined." -- Fred Brooks, Jr., _The Mythical Man Month_
