3 ms·
I think looking back at computer clock rates and memory is a silly endeavor. I remember a few months ago people commenting about "why we put a 2Mpx camera on t
by microDude 13y ago
I think looking back at computer clock rates and memory is a silly endeavor. I remember a few months ago people commenting about "why we put a 2Mpx camera on the Curiosity Rover". The simple fact is, mission critical hardware/software is a different ball-game. You need reliability and fault tolerance.
If I was going to the moon today and had the choice of flight computers. Hands down, I would choose the Apollo 11 AGC over an iPhone A6 processor based system.
- mikeash 13y agoIronically, the Apollo 11 landing was nearly scrubbed because the computer got overloaded with tasks and couldn't process everything in time, so that lack of power really was a problem.
- PavlovsCat 13y agoThe computer got overloaded because of crew error.
- mikeash 13y agoProcedural error, really. The crew followed their instructions, the instructions were just wrong. In any case, my point is that a somewhat more powerful computer would have tolerated this problem while the real one did not.
- PavlovsCat 13y agoI was going by the article, which called it a crew mistake, but either way, the computer was powerful enough for the correct procedure. To me, more powerful is likely to imply more complex, and that can also offer more attack surface for bugs and mistakes, so to speak, and at the very least requires more work to prove correct.. so to just make it more capable than you actually need, just in case, may not always be the best choice?