Sander Vesik
Vince
Incrementally advancing the state of the art is still advancing
the state of the art, even when it is not particularly novel.

Uhh... But "not particularily novel" = definitely not new technology.

If in 2005 they can make larger capacity hard drives, faster
CPUs, and bigger memory chips, you won't count that as new
technology because it is "not particularly novel"? I think
most computer guys count it as the "latest tech".

If GE makes a new jet engine and it is 5% more efficient, you
won't count it as "new technology" because it is not novel?
The airlines would count it as new technology.

To me it seems like most of technology advancement is incremental
and not particularly novel. People even talk about the
technology treadmill, in part because the progress is so
steady and regular.

I am beginning to wonder if many space people have this mindset
that incremental tech advancement does not count. Have people
bought into the NASA way of trying to leapfrog to some distant
tech without incremental improvements? Could this help explain
why launch technology has moved so slowly over the last 30 years?
Did Apollo give space people the wrong idea about tech?

These new space companies started by computer guys might not
have this hangup.

Might just be something to this...

-- Vince