I would not say it is unforgivably slow. When it comes to landing things like keeping attitude and slowing down for touchdown are easily automated. Keeping att

I would not say it is unforgivably slow. When it comes to landing things like keeping attitude and slowing down for touchdown are easily automated. Keeping attitude is what all rockets are designed to do. Slowing down for touchdown is also quite simple when you get precise distance to ground measurement and a human on Earth can point a relatively flat piece of ground to land on. SpaceX booster landings are difficult because of couple extra requirements. First, it is in Earth gravity and dense atmosphere and from high speed. Second, boosters are very long necessitating perfect stability at landing. Third, they use what is called "suicide burn" which means that boosters basically coast until almost end where they break very hard with basically nil margin for error. But this is in the name of efficiency because every kg of fuel saved on landing as many, many more that could not be taken to orbit. In other words, booster landing is very dynamic process. Compared to that landing on Moon surface were pretty simple and with relatively large margin for error. Landing on Moon surface could be done without large dynamic component like suicide burn. The craft can leisurely hover over the surface and touchdown with barely any speed. This is comparable to cheap quadcopter landing --keep your attitude straight, descend slowly loosing speed until it is zero at zero distance to ground.