By Stefanie Hoffman, ChannelWeb

“We do not know the precise location and nature of the failure,” Burch said.

The instrument operates at high temperature, something that could accelerate the degradation process. Long-term exposure to radiation in space could also have played a role, the scientists said.

The failure came as NASA was finalizing an Oct. 14 repair mission to the telescope, the fourth since Hubble was launched in 1990.

Over five spacewalks, astronauts from the space shuttle Atlantis were scheduled to install an ultraviolet spectrograph and a new wide-field camera, as well as repair failed electronics on the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph and the Advanced Camera for Surveys.

They also planned to attach a new set of gyroscopes.

Officials said Monday that that repair would be delayed until at least February, giving the shuttle repair crew time to train on installing a backup formatter.

As frustrated as he was by the new problems, Ed Weiler, associate administrator of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate, said if the unit was going to fail it was better that it fail before the repair mission rather than after.

While NASA studies a revamped repair mission, Burch said engineers at Goddard will probably make an attempt in the next few days to switch to a redundant set of controls that could bring the unit back to full operability.

The changeover is not as simple as throwing a switch, however, because multiple other instruments will also have to be commanded to make new connections to the formatter.

If it works, NASA will gain breathing space to plan and train for the new repair mission.

Every month that mission is delayed costs NASA about $10 million.

If all goes well with the complete set of repairs, Hubble’s new capabilities will easily surpass those it was intended to have at the time of its launch.

The repair mission has been controversial, however, because if anything goes wrong, the astronauts will be in the wrong orbit to reach the haven of the International Space Station.

Concerns over astronaut safety have been a key issue since the loss of the shuttle Columbia in 2003. Former NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe originally canceled the repair mission, deeming it too risky.

It was only reinstated after Congress allocated the money for the repair and required that it be spent on nothing else. Current NASA Administrator Michael D. Griffin believed the repair could be done safely and eventually gave the go-ahead.

Griffin has stated repeatedly that this will be the final repair for Hubble, conceivably giving it five or six more years of service before it breaks down for the last time. When that happens, it will be allowed to reenter Earth’s atmosphere and burn up.

john.johnson@latimes.com

Google’s first Android-based phone was announced yesterday and so far, the response has been mixed. Some believe it’ll be the next big thing in the cell phone business because it adds some basics — GPS and a physical keyboard — that the iPhone is lacking. Others believe the G1 will fall flat on its face because it’s not unique and its omissions (Exchange support, for one) will make it lose out in the corporate space.

I tend to agree on both counts. I think Android could be a major hit in the cell phone space, but the G1 won’t be able to stand up to Apple or RIM. It’s too underpowered and its obvious omissions tell me T-Mobile and Google rushed it before it was ready.

But Android is an entirely different story. At its core, Android is a platform that has tons of potential. It’s not only open (which is probably the best feature), it offers full Google integration, which is a key concept in today’s age of Google domination, and its touch-screen capabilities mean Apple isn’t the only other major company doing something unique in the market.

But my belief that Android will be a success goes far beyond the product itself. Call me crazy, but I can’t think of one reason why anyone would underestimate Google. Countless times, companies have ignored Google and let it slip into a market, only to learn when it’s too late that it’s the leader.

And while it’s easy for Apple and the rest to scoff now, you can bet that that’s exactly what Google wants.

Who would have thought that Google would become such a powerhouse in the tech industry? Ask.com certainly didn’t think it could happen and neither did Yahoo. AOL must have thought Google was just another flash in the pan. Oh how wrong they were.

And what about Hotmail, Yahoo Mail, and the rest? Certainly Microsoft and Yahoo didn’t believe that a product called Gmail would make an impact, right? After all, why would anyone actually want to use an online email application from Google when they can use Outlook on any Windows machine in existence? Nice one, Microsoft.

Speaking of Microsoft, where was it when Google was building its online advertising empire? And why didn’t it stop Google in its tracks once the company started bringing Google Docs online to compete with Office? Oh, and what about that whole search thing? Didn’t Microsoft see that one coming?

Google has its grips in countless markets in the tech industry. It leads the way in search and advertising, but it’s a major player in online productivity apps, mapping solutions, and a slew of other places where the leader was supplanted without much worry. And although it’s still struggling with YouTube, we can’t forget that Google was the only company that had both the money and vision to acquire that site.

The key to Google’s success throughout the years is two-fold: it offered superior products because it understood what customers wanted, but it also capitalized on all its competitors that failed to believe that a company with that crazy name could become a powerhouse in any market.

Oh, how wrong they were.

And now, as Android finally hits store shelves next month, companies in the cell phone industry are making the same mistake. Microsoft claims it isn’t worried about Android (we’ve been down this road before, Microsoft), Apple doesn’t see it as a worry, and RIM has practically ignored it. All the while, Sergey and Larry have been forming alliances with companies that will see dozens of Android-based phones hit store shelves over the next few years.

Have any of these companies learned anything? Sure, the search and advertising business is much different that cell phone software, but Google’s knowledge about what the consumer wants hasn’t changed. Worse, Google’s understanding of what the market needs has gotten better over time.

At this point, I don’t know if Android will lead the way in the cell phone industry and I have no idea if Google will supplant Apple and the rest or face annihilation. But if I had to put money on the most likely outcome, I wouldn’t bet against Google. The company has been right too many times to bet against it.

Apple, RIM, Microsoft, and the rest need to wake up and realize that the G1’s success isn’t indicative of the future success of Google in the cell phone industry. Android is.