Hardly. That would require an assertion like 'any perceived complexity for implementing a Java VM in hardware did not exist because it was rolled out in the most economic way possible given non-technical constraints, and it also did not slow down the implementation beyond the minimum absolutely necessary for any technical solution possible.'.
Notice the difference?
To propose alternative solutions based on practical economic effect just requires a reasonable degree of comparison to projects of similar scope at other times, reports of difficulty from various vendors, and comparisons of end price for this solution, end price for other solutions of similar scope, to the overall scope of the solution and value it brings. None of which requires perfect alternative universe A/B testing to come to some reasonable analysis.
If another solution could be done for half the price (say $0.005 per unit, instead of $0.01 per unit) but the perceived value for vendors is $1/unit - then it's hard to say there is any practical economic effect going either way. Neither solution would block profitability or value. That said, they could easily be compared and better/worse solutions could also be determined or tradeoffs analyzed based on that data, also without perfect alternate universe A/B testing to come to some reasonable analysis. Industry does this all the time at scale, including projected costs of implementation of various solutions.
If the solution was rolled out within a timeframe considered useful/expected for this kind of solution, then it also didn't slow down implementation meaningfully - as in it didn't block it, or add serious delay. If there is another solution which could have been done in half the time, that's cool. But it wasn't required. Identifying such an alternative, if one exists, could be done if you have any data, without having to do an alternative universe A/B test. Though since the proof is in the pudding, to REALLY be sure maybe it would. But that's hardly what I've been referring to or asking for, clearly.
Doesn't mean they wouldn't have been better solutions, and proposed them as alternatives can easily be done without parallel universes! In fact, chances are they have already been implemented somewhere in another niche, so there is adequate data to do so.
> If the solution was rolled out within a timeframe considered useful/expected for this kind of solution, then it also didn't slow down implementation meaningfully - as in it didn't block it, or add serious delay.
