4 ms·

In the end, SpaceX is America’s only reliable way to get to space. It’s great that it’s also cheap considering that. Boeing is, as usual: cheap, fast, good; pic

In the end, SpaceX is America’s only reliable way to get to space. It’s great that it’s also cheap considering that. Boeing is, as usual: cheap, fast, good; pick none.

croes 2y ago
Just wait. When SpaceX gets the same status then Boeing they will become similar in quality.
- _diyar 2y ago
  It's fair to say that Boeing's status within their industries enabled them to slide down the slippery slope of quality and reliability. SpaceX does seem to become more dominant over time. But to actually go down that path also requires a culture of management by non-engineers (MBAs have a bad rep for a reason). SpaceX, at least for now, has a strong engineering culture and does not seem at risk of becoming one. In other words, status is necessary but not sufficient for enshittification.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    Boeing had a strong engineering culture. Things can change quick.
  - piva00 2y ago
    I don't see many incentives in the current American corporate culture to keep a company leading in technical proficiency to maintain that status after they acquire the market they are looking for. All the incentives are tilted over financial engineering rather than actual product/hard engineering, after the initial lift-off from technical prowess there's very little embedded in the capital system to keep that corporate culture instead of derailing it into financial juggling.
michaelsshaw 2y ago
SpaceX rockets routinely fail to orbit
- senectus1 2y ago
  they also more than routinely not just make it to orbit but land nicely to be used again. Good luck Boeing trying to match that record.
  - michaelsshaw 2y ago
    Boeing was involved with the Saturn V. The only vehicle to take humans beyond LEO, decades before I was even born. No excuses for rockets that don't work in this day and age. I say good luck to SpaceX matching that record. BTW, I'm not defending Boeing, more just some spacex hate :p
    - octopoc 2y ago
      > No excuses for rockets that don't work in this day and age. Please point out the rocket that has a perfect record. Saturn V had failures too FYI. Besides, cost and global politics are at play as well. Musk and Putin are indeed the only options but Musk is American and also cheaper ($2,720/kg) than Putin's ($4,320/kg)[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_launch_market_competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_launch_market_competitio...
      - michaelsshaw 2y ago
        It had one single failure in 13 launches, like 60 fucking years ago. Would you consider that a better ratio than Starship? Apollo 8, first manned mission of the SV, to the moon and back. Total success. I'd like to see anyone at SpaceX with that kind of balls. Also, not a fan of your American = better framing. American is often inferior. For example, I only fly airbus because I value my life.

In the end, SpaceX is America’s only reliable way to get to space. It’s great that it’s also cheap considering that. Boeing is, as usual: cheap, fast, good; pick none.

croes 2y ago

Just wait. When SpaceX gets the same status then Boeing they will become similar in quality.

_diyar 2y ago
It's fair to say that Boeing's status within their industries enabled them to slide down the slippery slope of quality and reliability. SpaceX does seem to become more dominant over time. But to actually go down that path also requires a culture of management by non-engineers (MBAs have a bad rep for a reason). SpaceX, at least for now, has a strong engineering culture and does not seem at risk of becoming one. In other words, status is necessary but not sufficient for enshittification.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  Boeing had a strong engineering culture. Things can change quick.
- piva00 2y ago
  I don't see many incentives in the current American corporate culture to keep a company leading in technical proficiency to maintain that status after they acquire the market they are looking for. All the incentives are tilted over financial engineering rather than actual product/hard engineering, after the initial lift-off from technical prowess there's very little embedded in the capital system to keep that corporate culture instead of derailing it into financial juggling.

michaelsshaw 2y ago

SpaceX rockets routinely fail to orbit

senectus1 2y ago
they also more than routinely not just make it to orbit but land nicely to be used again. Good luck Boeing trying to match that record.
- michaelsshaw 2y ago
  Boeing was involved with the Saturn V. The only vehicle to take humans beyond LEO, decades before I was even born. No excuses for rockets that don't work in this day and age. I say good luck to SpaceX matching that record. BTW, I'm not defending Boeing, more just some spacex hate :p
  - octopoc 2y ago
    > No excuses for rockets that don't work in this day and age. Please point out the rocket that has a perfect record. Saturn V had failures too FYI. Besides, cost and global politics are at play as well. Musk and Putin are indeed the only options but Musk is American and also cheaper ($2,720/kg) than Putin's ($4,320/kg)[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_launch_market_competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_launch_market_competitio...
    - michaelsshaw 2y ago
      It had one single failure in 13 launches, like 60 fucking years ago. Would you consider that a better ratio than Starship? Apollo 8, first manned mission of the SV, to the moon and back. Total success. I'd like to see anyone at SpaceX with that kind of balls. Also, not a fan of your American = better framing. American is often inferior. For example, I only fly airbus because I value my life.