>, but fundamentally what SpaceX do is iterative development. Yes, SpaceX and many other companies (aircraft companies, car companies, etc) also "iterate" ...

>, but fundamentally what SpaceX do is iterative development. Yes, SpaceX and many other companies (aircraft companies, car companies, etc) also "iterate" ... but you're losing sight of the original question[1] that was ask by gp (Stratoscope) and the context of "iterative development" for this thread. The author of the paper was trying to explain the difference between "classical analysis" vs "experimentation" to drive new business strategy. Yes the companies forced to do "classical analysis" _also_ do product "experimentation/iteration". However, when the author breaks out "experimentation/iteration" as a separate type of "business learning", he's talking about Eric Ries' version of "fast & cheap iteration" and not SpaceX's slower more expensive iteration. >It is ten billion dollars to build the old system, [...] Yes, they are all more expensive than software, And these are the real-world financial constraints that bias "classical analysis" over cheap iteration of the author's two learning styles. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27232118 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27232118