Death Sentence for the Hubble?

Jeff Findley ) wrote:

: "Eric Chomko" wrote in message
: ...
: Jeff Findley ) wrote:
: : It's arguable that today's servers bear little resemblance to
: yesterday's
: : inflexible mainframes, but I'll concede the point.
:
: You'll concede the point because you're wrong! Today's servers resemble
: yesterday's mainframes and today's PCs resemble yesterday's terminals
: (connected to those mainframes), better than any other similar analogy in
: IT one can come up with! The fact that a PC can do much alone is simply an
: added bonus, etc. A better telecommuting analogy cannot possibly be made.

: Yesterday's mainframes are similar to today's servers, but yesterday's
: terminals are not similar to today's PC. There is a very good reason that
: we called them DUMB terminals. They could do absolutely nothing without
: being connected to a mainframe. The only memory they had was screen memory.

A PC without the Internet is dumb. You miss that. Sure we can do a lot
more with a PC than we can with a dumb terminal, but the analogy still
holds (i.e. client/server).

: Anything you typed was sent to the mainframe and anything that was displayed
: came from the mainframe. When you turned off the power on your dumb
: terminal, you didn't loose any data, as it was all on the mainframe.

: Personal computers today are "real" computers. You can use them to do
: meaningful work without being connected to a server.

But you cannot have the Internet without getting on-line. Sure PCs are
superior to dumb terminals, but you still need to log-on like you did with
mainframes and terminals.

: : Scaled Composites and the other startups have as their leaders the
: : industry's equivalents of the likes of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. These
: : companies (and the people who lead them) have the potential to
: revolutionize
: : the industry.
:
: I hope so. Do you know when the next launch is?

: Ask Virgin Galactic. They're the ones who will be selling the launches on
: vehicles they buy from Scaled Composites.

: : Well whoever it is they stand to make a bundle. And whining about
: NASA,
: : L-Mart, Boeing, etc. ain't going to do squat! Like the message in the
: : movie "Field of Dreams", 'build it and they will come', makes a helova
: lot
: : of sense WRT to CATS.
:
: : Ignoring the issue is a recipe for failure. There have been many, many
: : launch vehicle startups over the decades that have failed. It may
: interest
: : you to find out why they failed and how those failures relate to the
: anove
: : mentioned organizations.
:
: Do you have a reference?

: The public library. Grab yourself a copy of the Readers' Guide to
: Periodical Literature and start looking. If you lived close by, I'd let
: you rummage through my stacks of aerospace periodicals which fill several
: filing cabinents.

: : The "only game in town" is too expensive to truly open up space to
: anyone
: : but government sponsored astronauts. If that's the kind of future you
: want,
: : then your point is valid. If you'd like to see civilians in LEO, then
: NASA
: : vehicles won't get you there.
:
: I do want commercial spaceflight. We should have it. I was disapointed
: that Mir wasn't saved by some private enterprise. I'd like ISS to get
: turned over to the public some day in a manner that the Internet was
: turned over.

: : CATS.
:
: I think everyone does. But how do you do it? And cheap access to space
: with no payload will get you exactly what?
:
: Can you achieve CATS with a shuttle size payload? Half? Quarter?

: Let the market decide. Force NASA out of the launch vehicle business (don't
: let it create a shuttle derived vehicle). Force NASA out of the manned
: spacecraft business (let it buy rides on vehicles owned and operated solely
: by private companies). End the socialistic monopoly that NASA has on manned
: spaceflight.

The we'd have to wait. No, when the lauch market comes up with CATS then
shift gears. Otherwise it's business as usual.

: : Unfortunately, it's hard to convince investors of this "fact" when
: investors
: : are told that this goes against conventional wisdom. It's even harder
: when
: : they hear this from the "experts" at spaceflight at NASA, who believe
: the
: : only way to get people into space is with the (expensive) infrastructure
: at
: : KSC.
:
: ...based upon results, how can you really argue? SS1 needs a orbial
: followon to really get anyone's attention.

: In your opinion. I think a profitable suborbital tourism business would do
: the same thing. I think Virgin Galactic has a shot at doing just that.

We'll see...

: : And at the time, the "usual suspects" in the computer industry would say
: : that "that isn't a real computer" because it could never do as much as a
: : mainframe computer. This is *exactly* like SS1 is today. The "usual
: : suspects" in the aerospace industry think SS1 is a toy and say it's "not
: a
: : real spaceship", because it can't get into orbit.
:
: Well the usual suspects inluded IBM and DEC. IBM made the PC and made a
: bundle for awhile was was previously noted. DEC fell by the wayside.
:
: But to continue with your analogy thus far WRT PC market and commercial
: space, we are at around 1970 with the 4004 microprocessor and haven't even
: created a kit computer as was done in 1975.

: I'd say the prototype "personal spaceship" has already flown (SS1), and now
: we're waiting for the production model. Certainly these "personal
: spaceships" won't be orbital at first, but the first Z80 based PC's didn't
: do the job of a mainframe either. The Z80 based PC's were looked down upon
: by people who used mainframes as toys, but they were found in small
: businesses doing real work. Suborbital spaceships will do much the same.

You speak about Z-80s, we're at the 4004/8008 version of commercial
spaceflight. Check out those two microprocessors to get an idea.

: And there exists security issues of getting a launch vehicle in the wrong
: hands where a PC, though a potential weapon, can't harm in the same manner
: a rocket can.

: The US classifies fast PC's as "supercomputers" and does not allow their
: export because they are seen as a potential security threat.

Phooey! Anybody can get a fast PC with enough $$$.

Eric

: Jeff
: --
: Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.