The high philosophy is interesting … but what DETAILED technical differences
exist between the SpaceX orbital, money making, ELV becoming ELV and the Blue
Origin tourist class sub-orbital RLV wannabe orbital RLV?
Are there hard technical differences that make a difference?
K
On Jan 24, 2016, at 3:26 PM, Edward Wright <edward.v.wright@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm interested in people who test their vision in the marketplace. I'm less
interested in people who just play with the neat toys for as long as the
money lasts.
I heard similar comments 40 years ago, when some companies started building
"toy" computers.
Trivial things happen when the boss gets to build what they want.
Interesting things happen when the boss builds what other people want.
Hmm. So, Steve Jobs was trivial; Steve Balmer interesting?
I saw a lot of "interesting" Microsoft products that were "just what people
wanted" during the Balmer era. Some of which I'm not able to talk about.
Probably not the same definition of "interesting" you're using, however.
At Pixar, they say they don't make movies the audience wants to see --they
make the movies they want to see. Contrast that to the Eisner era at Disney,
where every decision was driven by focus testing and "creative executives."
So, "Toy Story" trivial; "Pocohantas," and "Hunchback of Notre Dame," and
"Brother Bear" interesting? But which one made more money?
"Don't forget to leap before you look." -- Steve Jobs, trivial business
leader
