*cough*
Kinda depends on walking a fine line there I guess, but yeah more or less.
There are still Saturn V's around.
The one that blew up is a bit of a different creature.
It is like the USAF doesn't build fighters but they know what they want and hire companies to build it. For rockets the technology is fairly old. Now want to develop a technology to soft land a 1-ton rover on Mars and NASA is all over that. NASA should be focusing on the ground breaking technology and not the tech that is well known, like building a rocket. They should make sure they retain enough to knowledge to provide oversight.
The Commercial Cargo contract's themselves where based on fix priced contracting for delivering cargo. Which isn't a bad idea. If you look at the Falcon 9 and Dragon development. Under normal cost-plus contracting it would have cost a estimated 3.6 Billion to develop the launch vehicle and spacecraft. NASA paid 400 Million and it cost SpaceX another 450 Million to develop the Dragon and Falcon 9. So NASA saved 3.2 Billion in development cost.
Launch vehicles fail, just like any aerospace vehicle. I am sure that Orbital will look at the telemetry and figure out what went wrong and correct it. Luckily it wasn't a expensive payload like a Mars Rover, 1-Billion dollar spy satellite etc. This is also why the USAF is so picky about picking who is allowed to launch their equipment.