[TR] NASA's $2.5bn Curiosity rover: Apple PowerBook specs on wheels - Page 19

Should have used a XBOX (not 360)

xbox isn't even reliable on earth. and xbox was worse than 360 too

The context changes the whole meaning of your statement. - I read it as meaning "Because it's the Internet, your opinion means nothing", hence my reply. If that's not what you meant though, ignore my comment as I misunderstood you.

Sure...but then why are we on a discussion forum?

In all seriousness, it is against the rules for me to discuss my overclocked Macintosh on this forum due to it breaking EULAs...

I agree, but I didn't start the argument - I merely posted a sarcastic reply. I also think you need to look-up the meaning of "irony".

For some strange reason, that genuinely made me

Time. I may well start such a thread when that precious commodity is in plentiful supply...the PC advice / discussion is generally good around here, but why does every third thread have to turn into an Apple-bashing, cliché ridden circle jerk?

Back on (the original) topic though, I'm interested in the testing programme that qualifies a component for a space vehicle. If it takes years to test something like a chip, it seems like we need to create a faster process. Basically we need to improve the methods we use to test. This originally struck me when I was looking into the development of military aircraft, particularly stealth technology. The F22 for example first flew in 1997 but didn't enter service until 2005. This would have given America's opponents 8 years to come-up with a countermeasure for the stealth technology employed on the aircraft. If they had, the F22s main tactical advantage over something like a Eurofighter or Sukhoi would have been lost and the whole thing would have been a waste...

...back to space exploration: Surely with advances in technology, it would be possible to get more exploration done in the first place?