Why is the number of AF points a better measuring stick than megapixels?
I typically only use 1 AF point, so if the camera has 65, 64 of them are useless to me.
And when one isn't good enough, I use live view.
Whereas I can use every megapixel with every photograph.
As it is with AF points, it is the quality of them that matters more than the number of them. If the 6D had 39 AF points that worked about as well as the 5D2's 11 then it wouldn't matter if it had 39 or 390 - only one of them would actually be of use. So it all depends on if the 6D will have 11 AF points then is the AF module simply a 5D2 "spare part" or a completely new module.
Oh, as for SD vs CF. It's a pointless comparison. It's a place to put digital photographs, nothing more. If the camera didn't have such a thing then that would be a problem.
There are applications when live view is useful, however, there are much more of those that it's not.
Good for you that you can find only 1 AF point sufficient. However, for most photographers, that's not the case. Focus and recompose technique doesn't work well with fast primes when shot wide open. When I used 5D2 with 85L in well-lit area, even a slight move from an outer focus point would end up as the picture is out of focus.
So, to me, this camera would be a letdown if it has only 1 cross-type sensor. Still, I do believe that the leaked specs should read "11-point all cross-type AF (f/2.8 at center: Dual Cross Sensor)". 11 cross-type points would be a little disappointing, but definitely acceptable compared to only 1 cross-type.
I could have used this one as a backup if it has flipped screen and built-in flash. But it doesn't look like it's gonna come out that way.