GPS was planned out and deployed over 20 years (from proposal to operational).

It was also designed and worked for its intended purpose with only 24 satellites.

Block III gps satellites are designed to last 15 years and there are 10 of them.

Starlink is disposable chains of 1,000s of satellites that will be constantly burning up in the atmosphere and replaced at huge costs, including co2 from the launches.

I don't think it's the same, we already have the infrastructure for the network in most places with a dense population. Existing infrastructure is of the similar quality to Starlink, and the maintenance cost for the existing infrastructure is lower.

In case of GPS, the infrastructure existing before was much worse.

The only cases I can think of, where Starlink outperforms the existing infrastructure are:

1. Areas with low population density - the problem, in those areas, by definition, there aren't many customers

2. Situation when someone is actively trying to sabotage the existing infrastructure, like those ships, that are breaking underwater internet cables, or the active jamming near the front lines - what happens in the Ukraine shows that Starlink is great for that case. It is enough to treat it as strategically important, but it doesn't justify the starlink valuation. I really hope this market won't grow much.