They may be in the same hospital building, but they get very different treatment from what you or I get. That's because your average Joe is as valuable to a hospital as his insurance policy, but a rich guy is worth far more

Yes, the rich guy is worth 100x more. And typically has a floor/wing of the building named after so rich guy that later contributed to the facility.

"live up to its potential as an educational tool"

Thank business and advertisement industries for that. They have no care for the educational system aside from selling/exploiting it.

Why not a android phone and the ADK board? Sort of the best of both worlds with a sacrifice in footprint..

Why do you think Google is making self-driving cars?

To get you to the store after you see that sky advertisement.

Office productivity and a high tech software company:

Please refer to The Matrix, scene 5.

Maybe it's because Linux [kernel] isn't the complete solution, but just part of the solution.

that's why MS, Apple, Android, BB, etc... still control the majority of the market, they provide the support tool, services, or features in a way that people find or think they have a complete solution. Linux by itself does not: hence why IBM and Redhat are doing so well and the Year of the Linux desktop has become nothing to the average consumer and the butt of a joke in this community.

There is no cat.

He took some engineering courses in college, so that he has the amplitude to complete an engineering-required task, much like an engineer [by training] trying to develop a DSP s/w driver on Linux (he's not a computer scientist afterall).

To most non-engineers, they only know one method of engineering that's easy to understand: trial and error. That is something all engineers take for granted and something that makes engineering intuitive...and why it is a discipline: that anyone can learn it.

This is just a learning curve for SpaceX. It's not going to be roses for these guys as much as the Internet-to-Space investors want it to be. And I'm sure Musk and his ex-JPL/NASA boys know this. There's going to be more (and even spectacular) failures initially than successes. Just ask Orbital--Orbital Sciences has been through this as the OP said... decades ago.

Still rooting for them though.

I'm wondering where Virgin G is nowadays...

university: innovative thinking
military: innovative action (processes and products)

then there's

Silicon Valley: innovative way of making money... hey, aren't there lots of gaming companies in the valley?

The theory is that drones should fly better than manned aircraft--makes logical sense since drones are essentially robots/computers.

The experience is that drone crash more often and mainly caused by human error. Since drones are remotely controlled exclusively, not in a supervisory manner.

The practice is that drone control, equipment, telemetry and pilot training, though not classified as manned operation, were based on manned operation principles (e.g. rules of engagement for instance).

Basically the Human Machine Interface, which includes user interfaces, operational protocol, and vehicle capabilities (i.e. features) is based on manned experience and at this point, we can conclude it doesn't work. We are scratching the surface on proper drone oepration. I'm sure experts back in 1995 generals were thinking, "Oh, it's just like manned flight/operation w/o the physical person in the craft... viola! Done..."

BUT, it doesn't mean drones and the concept of drones are less worthy than manned aircraft. The HMI interface is just wrong. And a lot of the autonomous tech and what's being created on the hobby side is showing that there's a better HMI interface.

I find the new problems will relate to the problem of scale. Large scale, such as that in relationship to entropy. We think today's speak of scale, from biological systems, to CERN data results to the Internet architecture, is complex/hard. We have just scratch the surface of what's to come. And that's coming from a trained physicist.

What we see today, inventions are not science, but that of exploitation of science. With the popularity of "making money" (capitalism is just one of many methods of), we are in the age of science exploitation. That's why the current attitude is that "we're done"... and the result? Social technologies....
creativity is mostly being used to create connections and products and not explain nature. That's not right or wrong, but just the facts.

Good ol Dice...

There was a time not so long ago, (late 90's) when the name Dice.com was fitting (i.e. a roll of the dice).

It's Apple. Linux is just a side show as Apple is eating MS's lunch.

Basically, Dell has brand cache and [used to build] rock solid hardware. If MS can snatch Dell up without paying much (either a buyout, takeover or... loan), then they can compete against Apple and can create the pro-business desire of the elusive closed ecosystem. Nokia is a sinking ship for MS (just keeps everyone at bay). As for servers, pay up on service contracts (MS's ecosystem) or hire expensive sysadmins (Linux)--all ends up costing the same for the commercial user due to the integration problem.

A this point of Linux server adoption, MS likely thinks Linux can go for the guys not willing to pay up or want their own support.... In hopes that it accelerates the environment of Linux apps that are unlicensable (e.g. Mpeg4), slow (the latest DEs), incompatible (mobile, video, flash), or closed (e.g. Android in some respects).

The Tomcat/Linux combo is not because of performance or technology.

It's just when you use tomcat and Java,9 out of 10 IT pros might as well go free and clear with free (not as in beer) Linux instead of paying for Windows, MSDN support, subscripts and stuff. It's not about the tech, it's about the cash!