Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Universe?

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

Polar-Ice the viewscreen.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

"In a Mirror, Darkly" treated the USS Defiant as futuristic technology-meets-art. That pretty much explains the various different looks that Trek ships have sported over the years - from the blinking coloured squares of TOS, to the touchscreen DOS of TNG all the way to the swirly blue graphics on the new bridge. It's the whim of the 23rd century artist/designers.

 

[martok2112]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

What I find amazing is that you only joined this BBS a few days ago and yet act as if you know all about us and feel the presumption to tell us what we're supposed to be doing here.

This is the only thing I will add to this: Yes, I only joined here a view days ago. Does that make my opinion less valid? Is this an "Invite Only" Board, for people that all agree on the JJ-Films beeing the greatest thing in the universe? And Berman the worst? Do I say that my opinion is the only opinion that is correct?
The point of a discussion is discussing. People have different standpoints. But if individuals start believing, that their standpoint is the only valid standpoint, and treat everyone else with a different point of view like an idiot, I have a problem with it. So, if I am accused to have come here, and tell people to do something let it be this: Star Trek is about tolerance. As fans we should at least try to act in its spirit.

And yet you felt the need, after only joining this site a few days ago, to call out Martok2112 and personally attack his post for doing nothing whatsoever except stating how he personally feels about fandom. Perhaps you need to stop preaching tolerance and start actually living it.

Thank you, Wulff, for making my point for me, because it is those people who want to say: "If you love TOS Trek and Abrams Trek, then you are not a true fan." who are the ones who overvalue their own opinions and mistake them for immutable, irrefutable fact. And sadly, it is a trait that started even as far back as whichever Trek movie was the punching bag of the moment. "You're telling me you actually enjoyed Star Trek V ?! You are not a true fan!". Yes, Trek V might be accepted by a large percentage of Trek folk as the worst of the OS movies, and Nemesis might be accepted as the worst of the TNG line (and I could agree with points made about both), but to tell me that I am not a true fan because I still enjoyed them? Yeah....that's tolerance, buddy.

So, I gave up and turned my back on the duplicity of fandom. I would never deign to tell someone they weren't a true fan of Trek if they enjoyed TFF or Nemesis (the latter of which happens to be my favorite of the NG movies), because they have the right to like what they like, even if it flies in the face of the self-appointed elite of Trek fandom. And yes, for all its flaws, I still enjoy TFF... It doesn't rate high on my Trek favorites list, but I still enjoy it because it does have some really good moments, as any Trek film should.

Your amusing accusation of me being some kind of paid plant by Bad Robot only serves to further drive my point home. Thank you, Wulff. . I've heard the same accusations made of myself and others by hardcore old-schoolers just because I/we enjoyed the recent Battlestar Galactica series as well as the original. (What? Are you a stealth marketer for the Sci-Fi Channel/Ron Moore?! You are not a true Galactica fan!)

The list, as ever, goes on.


Now, to get more light-hearted:

Cyke, M'Sharak, and Mr.LaserBeam.....good ones! Gummi bear and Jujube control buttons and Polar Ice viewscreens.

Nice to know that even Willy Wonka may also have had a hand in Federation starship design back then, and perhaps even now.

King Daniel....that is a great avatar!

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

This is the only thing I will add to this: Yes, I only joined here a view days ago. Does that make my opinion less valid? Is this an "Invite Only" Board, for people that all agree on the JJ-Films beeing the greatest thing in the universe? And Berman the worst? Do I say that my opinion is the only opinion that is correct?
The point of a discussion is discussing. People have different standpoints. But if individuals start believing, that their standpoint is the only valid standpoint, and treat everyone else with a different point of view like an idiot, I have a problem with it. So, if I am accused to have come here, and tell people to do something let it be this: Star Trek is about tolerance. As fans we should at least try to act in its spirit.

And yet you felt the need, after only joining this site a few days ago, to call out Martok2112 and personally attack his post for doing nothing whatsoever except stating how he personally feels about fandom. Perhaps you need to stop preaching tolerance and start actually living it.

Thank you, Wulff, for making my point for me, because it is those people who want to say: "If you love TOS Trek and Abrams Trek, then you are not a true fan." who are the ones who overvalue their own opinions and mistake them for immutable, irrefutable fact. And sadly, it is a trait that started even as far back as whichever Trek movie was the punching bag of the moment. "You're telling me you actually enjoyed Star Trek V ?! You are not a true fan!". Yes, Trek V might be accepted by a large percentage of Trek folk as the worst of the OS movies, and Nemesis might be accepted as the worst of the TNG line (and I could agree with points made about both), but to tell me that I am not a true fan because I still enjoyed them? Yeah....that's tolerance, buddy.

So, I gave up and turned my back on the duplicity of fandom. I would never deign to tell someone they weren't a true fan of Trek if they enjoyed TFF or Nemesis (the latter of which happens to be my favorite of the NG movies), because they have the right to like what they like, even if it flies in the face of the self-appointed elite of Trek fandom. And yes, for all its flaws, I still enjoy TFF... It doesn't rate high on my Trek favorites list, but I still enjoy it because it does have some really good moments, as any Trek film should.

Your amusing accusation of me being some kind of paid plant by Bad Robot only serves to further drive my point home. Thank you, Wulff. . I've heard the same accusations made of myself and others by hardcore old-schoolers just because I/we enjoyed the recent Battlestar Galactica series as well as the original. (What? Are you a stealth marketer for the Sci-Fi Channel/Ron Moore?! You are not a true Galactica fan!)

The list, as ever, goes on.

You know, I'd kind of hoped that we'd be done with the snipey personal stuff after my post here.

Since that seems not to be the case, allow me to invite all parties named martok2112, Dukhat or Wulff359 to drop it now, please, or take it to some other venue which is outside this thread, outside this forum and preferably off the board altogether.

Aaaand back to topic.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

The NuBridge as some have said looks like a apple store.

It looks nothing like an Apple Store. That's nothing more than a bumper sticker slogan people learned to parrot. At best, it's a feeble attempt at a put-down, intended to dress the actual sentiment of "I don't like it" in more self-important guise.

It definitely been inspired by apple. I think Abrams could have took the original bridge design and updated it. What we got does not resemble the TOS bridge at all. Its just my opinion on the subject and not a feeble put down. If others here disagree that fine because that's why I started the thread to have a fun conversation about this. True I love TOS best of all but I like to hear other views.

Also the recreation of the bridge in the ST:Enterprise In a Mirror Darkly showed just how the TOS era ships could work if the effects were available in the 60s. The NX-01 actually looked primitive next to the Defiant.

Strange you should make that claim. As I well recall, the common complaint when Enterprise was on the air was that the NX-01 looked "too advanced" to belong to a period 100-plus years earlier than the Enterprise or Defiant of the Original Series.

The complaints stopped after "in a mrirror darkly". Many fans found that the production crew did a excellent job it making the original TOS Defiant look more advanced. When the episode went between shots of the interiors of both ships the defiant look more advanced compared to the clunky NX that had plasma screens jutting out everywhere. In a Mirror Darkly convinced me that the TOS era design could be updated in looks and function to seem more advanced.

The viewscreen technology is imbedded in the window.

Tech we essentially have in 2015, btw.

Yeah its tech we now have but doesn't make much sense because a window even if it is transparent aluminum cannot be as strong as a bulkhead. Putting such a large window around the bridge is bad design.

Do you really believe that the writers and designers should instead pretend it doesn't exist in order to be more faithful to a 1960s version of imagined future technology (which, if one is being honest, wasn't drastically different in appearance from what could already be seen in computer rooms and other high-tech facilities of the time)?

No but they can update the 60s version for today by keeping a similar look mixed in with more advanced tech. I don't think that would be difficult to do.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

And yet you felt the need, after only joining this site a few days ago, to call out Martok2112 and personally attack his post for doing nothing whatsoever except stating how he personally feels about fandom. Perhaps you need to stop preaching tolerance and start actually living it.

Thank you, Wulff, for making my point for me, because it is those people who want to say: "If you love TOS Trek and Abrams Trek, then you are not a true fan." who are the ones who overvalue their own opinions and mistake them for immutable, irrefutable fact. And sadly, it is a trait that started even as far back as whichever Trek movie was the punching bag of the moment. "You're telling me you actually enjoyed Star Trek V ?! You are not a true fan!". Yes, Trek V might be accepted by a large percentage of Trek folk as the worst of the OS movies, and Nemesis might be accepted as the worst of the TNG line (and I could agree with points made about both), but to tell me that I am not a true fan because I still enjoyed them? Yeah....that's tolerance, buddy.

So, I gave up and turned my back on the duplicity of fandom. I would never deign to tell someone they weren't a true fan of Trek if they enjoyed TFF or Nemesis (the latter of which happens to be my favorite of the NG movies), because they have the right to like what they like, even if it flies in the face of the self-appointed elite of Trek fandom. And yes, for all its flaws, I still enjoy TFF... It doesn't rate high on my Trek favorites list, but I still enjoy it because it does have some really good moments, as any Trek film should.

Your amusing accusation of me being some kind of paid plant by Bad Robot only serves to further drive my point home. Thank you, Wulff. . I've heard the same accusations made of myself and others by hardcore old-schoolers just because I/we enjoyed the recent Battlestar Galactica series as well as the original. (What? Are you a stealth marketer for the Sci-Fi Channel/Ron Moore?! You are not a true Galactica fan!)

The list, as ever, goes on.

You know, I'd kind of hoped that we'd be done with the snipey personal stuff after my post here.

Since that seems not to be the case, allow me to invite all parties named martok2112, Dukhat or Wulff359 to drop it now, please, or take it to some other venue which is outside this thread, outside this forum and preferably off the board altogether.

Aaaand back to topic.

Yeah I agree. The topic is more interesting than the personal banter here. I would actually hope one person on my side would come to bolster my point.

 

[Amaris]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

No but they can update the 60s version for today by keeping a similar look mixed in with more advanced tech. I don't think that would be difficult to do.

The question is why would they do that? Command consoles need to be uniform, and easily accessible, lest you find yourself in the heat of battle staring down five dozen red, blue, and yellow blinking buttons, all without labels?

Oh shit, the air is being sucked out of the ship via a hull breach on the main deck! The gravity has gone out as well, what do we do?! Don't worry! Instead of having a readable control interface for gravity or hull repair, we have this:

I'm sure you will have no trouble resolving the problem quickly.

 

[Cyke101]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

No but they can update the 60s version for today by keeping a similar look mixed in with more advanced tech. I don't think that would be difficult to do.

The question is why would they do that? Command consoles need to be uniform, and easily accessible, lest you find yourself in the heat of battle staring down five dozen red, blue, and yellow blinking buttons, all without labels?

Oh shit, the air is being sucked out of the ship via a hull breach on the main deck! The gravity has gone out as well, what do we do?! Don't worry! Instead of having a readable control interface for gravity or hull repair, we have this:

I'm sure you will have no trouble resolving the problem quickly.

Hey look, those are the gummy buttons I was talking about!

 

[Amaris]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

No but they can update the 60s version for today by keeping a similar look mixed in with more advanced tech. I don't think that would be difficult to do.

The question is why would they do that? Command consoles need to be uniform, and easily accessible, lest you find yourself in the heat of battle staring down five dozen red, blue, and yellow blinking buttons, all without labels?

Oh shit, the air is being sucked out of the ship via a hull breach on the main deck! The gravity has gone out as well, what do we do?! Don't worry! Instead of having a readable control interface for gravity or hull repair, we have this:

I'm sure you will have no trouble resolving the problem quickly.

Hey look, those are the gummy buttons I was talking about!

I want gummy bears now.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

The question is why would they do that? Command consoles need to be uniform, and easily accessible, lest you find yourself in the heat of battle staring down five dozen red, blue, and yellow blinking buttons, all without labels?

Oh shit, the air is being sucked out of the ship via a hull breach on the main deck! The gravity has gone out as well, what do we do?! Don't worry! Instead of having a readable control interface for gravity or hull repair, we have this:

I'm sure you will have no trouble resolving the problem quickly.

Hey look, those are the gummy buttons I was talking about!

I want gummy bears now.

They could update it without the "gummy" or as I like to call them jeweled buttons. Also i'm sure that buttons situated that way become easy to use once you've been trained. I do like the picture you posted because it shows some marked buttons.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

The NuBridge as some have said looks like a apple store.

It looks nothing like an Apple Store. That's nothing more than a bumper sticker slogan people learned to parrot. At best, it's a feeble attempt at a put-down, intended to dress the actual sentiment of "I don't like it" in more self-important guise.

It definitely been inspired by apple. I think Abrams could have took the original bridge design and updated it. What we got does not resemble the TOS bridge at all. Its just my opinion on the subject and not a feeble put down. If others here disagree that fine because that's why I started the thread to have a fun conversation about this. True I love TOS best of all but I like to hear other views.

<snip>

No but they can update the 60s version for today by keeping a similar look mixed in with more advanced tech. I don't think that would be difficult to do.

I fixed your messed-up quote attributions for you. Please try to be more careful about that.

<snip>

Aaaand back to topic.

Yeah I agree. The topic is more interesting than the personal banter here.

No one asked you, and comment on moderator actions or directions is customarily taken to PM so that it does not further disrupt the thread. Just FYI.

I would actually hope one person on my side would come to bolster my point.

Here's an idea: Why not have an honest discussion instead?

If you insist upon dragging in all of the same shtick ("Apple Store," etc.) which was already tired by time the first movie came out in 2009, not only should no one take your topic seriously, but it makes it look as if your only purpose in being here is to try to wind people up.

And you wouldn't want to give that impression... would you?

 

[fireproof78]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

The NuBridge as some have said looks like a apple store.

It looks nothing like an Apple Store. That's nothing more than a bumper sticker slogan people learned to parrot. At best, it's a feeble attempt at a put-down, intended to dress the actual sentiment of "I don't like it" in more self-important guise.

It definitely been inspired by apple. I think Abrams could have took the original bridge design and updated it. What we got does not resemble the TOS bridge at all. Its just my opinion on the subject and not a feeble put down. If others here disagree that fine because that's why I started the thread to have a fun conversation about this. True I love TOS best of all but I like to hear other views.




The complaints stopped after "in a mrirror darkly". Many fans found that the production crew did a excellent job it making the original TOS Defiant look more advanced. When the episode went between shots of the interiors of both ships the defiant look more advanced compared to the clunky NX that had plasma screens jutting out everywhere. In a Mirror Darkly convinced me that the TOS era design could be updated in looks and function to seem more advanced.

Tech we essentially have in 2015, btw.

Yeah its tech we now have but doesn't make much sense because a window even if it is transparent aluminum cannot be as strong as a bulkhead. Putting such a large window around the bridge is bad design.

Do you really believe that the writers and designers should instead pretend it doesn't exist in order to be more faithful to a 1960s version of imagined future technology (which, if one is being honest, wasn't drastically different in appearance from what could already be seen in computer rooms and other high-tech facilities of the time)?

No but they can update the 60s version for today by keeping a similar look mixed in with more advanced tech. I don't think that would be difficult to do.

Not to quibble (or maybe a little bit) but the concept of the bridge on top of the starship is a poor design as well.

In addition, there is something to be said about the psychological aspect of being able to see outside a window, regardless of practical aspects. Being in space and having no way to look out would be rather maddening, in my opinion.

In addition, if all the power is lost, or power is lost to the viewscreen, at least you can still see out the window and see what's going on.

As for the 60s tech, no I don't think it would be difficult to do, but I think it would be easy to lose the audience for the futuristic feel. I have recently enjoyed the Fallout games, but the interesting part of it is the fact that some tech never moved past the 50s era for computers (large towers, tape based, green text, among other things) is a bit immersion breaking, at least for me.

I won't argue that the TOS bridge could be filmed in a modern light, but how much must be kept to preserve the feel? I often feel that Star Trek gets bogged down in the technological minutia when the point of the technology was to present situations that people had to respond to, and not a specific aesthetic to adhere to.

Abrams bridge maybe could have been done in a 60s style, as could a lot of other things. I just feel like it was better to err towards more modern than more retro.

 

[Amaris]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

They could update it without the "gummy" or as I like to call them jeweled buttons. Also i'm sure that buttons situated that way become easy to use once you've been trained. I do like the picture you posted because it shows some marked buttons.

The question is why? From my current cell phone, I can rapidly access hundreds of commands without having to use another interface, nor memorizing the locations and functions of certain buttons, and yet that small screen can show me GPS coordinates, the current weather, the news, stock prices, music videos, I can Skype over it, and I can access a world of information: one button press.

What's easier? "Computer, seal bulkheads, restore gravity!"

or

"Press the third button from the left, below the yellow one, you know, the one that blinks red sometimes? Yeah, that one, and then flip that 3rd unmarked switch from the top, and then press these buttons: yellow, blue, red, blue, yellow, green, fourth from the top, and that white square, no not that one, the other one; the other one, there ya go. There will be no active display to tell you if you've immediately succeeded. Instead, the systematic display of the buttons and lights will blink out the results, because that's what computers in the 1960s did if they weren't printing output via paper teletype."

If a ship's designer turned my master situation console into a pretty light display with switch positions that had to be memorized, and only responded in the computer equivalent of morse code instead of the high end OLED master display every other ship has, I'd have them keel-hauled.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

It looks nothing like an Apple Store. That's nothing more than a bumper sticker slogan people learned to parrot. At best, it's a feeble attempt at a put-down, intended to dress the actual sentiment of "I don't like it" in more self-important guise.

It definitely been inspired by apple. I think Abrams could have took the original bridge design and updated it. What we got does not resemble the TOS bridge at all. Its just my opinion on the subject and not a feeble put down. If others here disagree that fine because that's why I started the thread to have a fun conversation about this. True I love TOS best of all but I like to hear other views.

<snip>

No but they can update the 60s version for today by keeping a similar look mixed in with more advanced tech. I don't think that would be difficult to do.

I fixed your messed-up quote attributions for you. Please try to be more careful about that.

Yeah I agree. The topic is more interesting than the personal banter here.

No one asked you, and comment on moderator actions or directions is customarily taken to PM so that it does not further disrupt the thread. Just FYI.

I would actually hope one person on my side would come to bolster my point.

Here's an idea: Why not have an honest discussion instead?

If you insist upon dragging in all of the same shtick ("Apple Store," etc.) which was already tired by time the first movie came out in 2009, not only should no one take your topic seriously, but it makes it look as if your only purpose in being here is to try to wind people up.

And you wouldn't want to give that impression... would you?

Ok but I honestly feel that's what the bridge looks like. I am not trying to wind people up at all. When the movie came out some reviewers and others liked that the bridge mimicked apple aesthetics. I have no problem with people feeling that or liking it but its not something I felt worked. The bridge is to bright and shiny to really function as something which may have to be used for combat.

 

[Amaris]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

Ok but I honestly feel that's what the bridge looks like. I am not trying to wind people up at all. When the movie came out some reviewers and others liked that the bridge mimicked apple aesthetics. I have no problem with people feeling that or liking it but its not something I felt worked. The bridge is to bright and shiny to really function as something which may have to be used for combat.

I love the bridge. I could easily see all of the screen displays, and everything was laid out in a sensible pattern. To me it was the epitome of the nerve center of the ship.

I mean, I think this is just gorgeous:

 

[Cyke101]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

Hey look, those are the gummy buttons I was talking about!

I want gummy bears now.

They could update it without the "gummy" or as I like to call them jeweled buttons.

Shatner's been known to eat those buttons during breaks in filming TOS because they were indeed gummy candies acting as futuristic buttons. If they were jeweled before, they ain't now!

 

[TRON JA307020]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

They could update it without the "gummy" or as I like to call them jeweled buttons. Also i'm sure that buttons situated that way become easy to use once you've been trained. I do like the picture you posted because it shows some marked buttons.

The question is why? From my current cell phone, I can rapidly access hundreds of commands without having to use another interface, nor memorizing the locations and functions of certain buttons, and yet that small screen can show me GPS coordinates, the current weather, the news, stock prices, music videos, I can Skype over it, and I can access a world of information: one button press.

What's easier? "Computer, seal bulkheads, restore gravity!"

or

"Press the third button from the left, below the yellow one, you know, the one that blinks red sometimes? Yeah, that one, and then flip that 3rd unmarked switch from the top, and then press these buttons: yellow, blue, red, blue, yellow, green, fourth from the top, and that white square, no not that one, the other one; the other one, there ya go. There will be no active display to tell you if you've immediately succeeded. Instead, the systematic display of the buttons and lights will blink out the results, because that's what computers in the 1960s did if they weren't printing output via paper teletype."

If a ship's designer turned my master situation console into a pretty light display with switch positions that had to be memorized, and only responded in the computer equivalent of morse code instead of the high end OLED master display every other ship has, I'd have them keel-hauled.

Maybe your right maybe not. Some complex machinery just doesn't work like a cellphone. Just think could we really design a nuclear plant or air craft carrier to operate that way? I don't think so.

 

[Amaris]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

Maybe your right maybe not. Some complex machinery just doesn't work like a cellphone. Just think could we really design a nuclear plant or air craft carrier to operate that way? I don't think so.

Yes. Yes we can. This is the Dragon V2 space ship control system:

This is the control system on the USS Theodore Roosevelt:

 

[TRON JA307020]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

Ok but I honestly feel that's what the bridge looks like. I am not trying to wind people up at all. When the movie came out some reviewers and others liked that the bridge mimicked apple aesthetics. I have no problem with people feeling that or liking it but its not something I felt worked. The bridge is to bright and shiny to really function as something which may have to be used for combat.

I love the bridge. I could easily see all of the screen displays, and everything was laid out in a sensible pattern. To me it was the epitome of the nerve center of the ship.

I mean, I think this is just gorgeous:

I think this is a production photo. The film bridge always seems so much brighter.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Re: Is The NuTrek Universe A Changed Timeline From The Star Trek Unive

Maybe your right maybe not. Some complex machinery just doesn't work like a cellphone. Just think could we really design a nuclear plant or air craft carrier to operate that way? I don't think so.

Yes. Yes we can. This is the Dragon V2 space ship control system:

Never heard of this. Where is it from?