The comment backlash against this anecdote is a little odd to me. No, it's not a perfect analogy. No, the cost comparison is neither fair nor complete nor comprehensive.
But it is an interesting connection to make, and there are interesting ideas that the comparison generates, so let's treat it like a parable rather than a critical business analysis.
If anything, one of the most striking comparisons is how work was done in a government-funded research lab versus how it is done in a startup. Own vs rent, meticulous simulation vs rapidly-iterated prototyping, waterfall vs agile, regulation vs free for all.
The superficial details of the story aren't actually that important, but there's a lot of meat to dig into.
People are complaining because the author ignores his own take-away: "Different time, different industry."
All of this "agile," "free for all," "start up" cuteness is okay when you're dealing with software, which generally only ever results in frustration or at worst lost profits. The standards and practices in industries where things can go wrong in epic, expensive, and dangerous ways is obviously quite different.
But it is an interesting connection to make, and there are interesting ideas that the comparison generates, so let's treat it like a parable rather than a critical business analysis.
If anything, one of the most striking comparisons is how work was done in a government-funded research lab versus how it is done in a startup. Own vs rent, meticulous simulation vs rapidly-iterated prototyping, waterfall vs agile, regulation vs free for all.
The superficial details of the story aren't actually that important, but there's a lot of meat to dig into.