Again, not that simple. The customer restore procedure was almost certainly tested(and in active use as customers blow up their own data often enough). It was _not_ tested on 800 customer stacks simultaneously, as that was considered a sitewide disaster by whoever dreamed up the failure modes to test for. Meanwhile the actual whole site disaster restore plan may or may not have been tested, but it was useless for this case since some customers were unaffected and would be damaged by the whole site plan.

Not really. They managed closer to "undo" the break, which still makes it look like their disaster recovery might also be un-tested.

I'm sure there are many companies who would lose 24hr of tracking to get back online in a few hr vs 14days. In the real world with deadlines and commitments this is madness.