This is true in only the most trivial sense. Technology, in fact leads science.
The reality is that science is the explanatory presentation of technological findings; occasionally science is merely a rationalization for what has been found by technology.... an erroneous rationalization such as Y rays, eugenics and CO2 causes global warming.
Simple example: have you ever heard of theoretical chemistry producing anything of technical value. Absolutely not, because the mechanisms of chemistry, energy transfer and molecular behavior are not yet accessible to enough technology to yield useful data on which to build scientific theory.
Argue against me. Throw in my face the power of Newton's science. You'll fail because Newton's science and Copernicus's were based on the technological development of the glass lens. The glass lens made possible the microscope and the telescope. The telescope was vital in showing the orbits of Jupiter's moons which led to Copernicus. Galileo's experiments, technical measurements, provided the data Newton used on gravitational models. We still have more technological know how about lenses than we do theory.
Theory about diffraction of light has been segmented since Newton's time because Newton had a wave theory of light based on a two pin hole technology and the prism and Huygens had a particle theory based on one pin hole. The complexity of lenses and coating is far beyond theory which sometimes catches up.
Hey, remember when theoretically impossible superconducting was found by IBM technologists at 100 degrees higher temperature than science said was possible?
Go back to my blog on the classes Niels Bohr taught at U. of Chicago. Bohr said all theory is based on the discovery of constants. Constants are always found by technologists.