"ZFS will play a major role in the technology of Time Machine."

That's an interesting statement since Time Machine doesn't require ZFS to work. How can something play a "major role" in something when it's not even there?

I think what you meant to say is that ZFS does many of the same things that Time Machine does, so future versions of Time Machine will surely take advantage of this and work with ZFS drives to become more efficient in the future.

Saying something like "ZFS will eventually play a major role in the technology of Time Machine" would be more accurate. A small detail, I know, but as currently worded it could certainly make readers think that their current HFS+ hard drives won't support Time Machine, which is not true.

You are absolutely correct. This, however, was marketing-speak.

The title and the article are misleading.

The title implies that Apple recognises that ZFS is the solution, whereas it only recognises that it has disk storage problems.

The article suggests that Mr. Howe works at Apple (because of the comment about Time Machine and of the writing in general) and spoke at some event called Blackfriars' Marketing, whereas Blackfriars' Marketing is just yet another blog written by consultants/analysts/whatever you like to call this kind of people who like to look like they know everything better than anyone.

Bad move from TMO.

Quote

Guest wrote:
The title and the article are misleading.

The title implies that Apple recognises that ZFS is the solution, whereas it only recognises that it has disk storage problems.

The article suggests that Mr. Howe works at Apple (because of the comment about Time Machine and of the writing in general) and spoke at some event called Blackfriars' Marketing, whereas Blackfriars' Marketing is just yet another blog written by consultants/analysts/whatever you like to call this kind of people who like to look like they know everything better than anyone.

Bad move from TMO.

You're right, that was unduly harsh. My apologies to John Martellaro and the TMO team, I should have pointed it out in a more civilised manner, and thank you for updating the article anyway.