OMG, no, anything but that!!! Freiberger fucked that up more than season 3 of TOS!
OMG! New preview! And it's great!
- Thread starter Roald
- Start date
Nothing can belong to the Kelvin universe because they're allowed to make them on a license that belongs to CBS. CBS can do what they want with Star Trek because they're the owners.
I think you found your way to completely the wrong thread. In fact, entirely the wrong forum.
I actually thought the series would be set long after Nemesis because it allows greater freedom. They can have their cake and eat it too. They can shuffle the pieces on the board up without having to worry about continuity and still call it prime timeline. Also, they wouldn't have to worry about the issue the new series looking more advance than the series which, in universe, take place later.You could put it fifty or a hundred years afterward and not deal with any of it.
But, they didn't do that. I love the time period they picked so I'm totally fine with the choice. Just a bit surprised.
- You're describing the literal 1960s/1970s concept of a dumb terminal, which doesn't actually exist anymore. Nowadays everything is a computer, even the "dumb" ones, aka thin clients. Of course these are relative terms and what we now have in handheld devices is more impressive than what were the most powerful computers decades ago. The point was to remember how dependent these are on external infrastructure. Some people think they can compare their phones to Trek handhelds because they can do things like check the weather and navigate. In reality, outside of very basic atmospheric pressure sensors and compasses, these capabilities are coming from a global network of servers and satellites.
- I said "network infrastructure in a box", not "network in a box". That is, the hardware that facilitates the network. And yup, a futuristic ham radio - "subspace" transceiver - is pretty much exactly what they are. For reference, this is about as small as those get:
https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1hlsh...and-Handheld-FM-Transceiver-two-way-radio.jpg
...and you'd be lucky to contact the next state over with that thing, let alone outer space. I'm pretty sure it doesn't have apps, either.
What's the matter? Are some TNGers sad because we haven't see a 'Conference Lounge' set where they can spend 40 minutes of the episode talking about how to modify the deflector to emit 'Particle X'; or sermonize about how 'right' the Federation policy pr Prime Directive is in 'Situation Y' is...?
Actually, even 'thin client' hardware and software in limited to the local hardware and drivers needed for whatever local storage and display capability said client has - depending on the setup, if the server connection goes down, it can't run any apps (aside from diagnostics) needed by the staff.
So yeah, while 'smarter' in some sense, it's still overall designed to behave like an old style 'dumb terminal' for security/software licensing control reasons.
I don't have a problem... that's just a remarkably big bridge.What's the matter? Are some TNGers sad because we haven't see a 'Conference Lounge' set where they can spend 40 minutes of the episode talking about how to modify the deflector to emit 'Particle X'; or sermonize about how 'right' the Federation policy pr Prime Directive is in 'Situation Y' is...?
.
I've decided Lorca has closeted love for 23C Toss Across and Slip n Slides.
^^^^
Well, maybe CBS is trying to give their Massively Multi-Player Online game licencee Cryptic Studios a break in designing future Star Trek Online game content as often the player complaints are "Hey the Bridge is too big - a lot bigger than we see in the various Star Trek shows..."
[Yeah sorry for the derail into Star Trek gaming. If you haven't played STO or read player comments you won't get it - but it was an opening I couldn't resist.]
If that's the case, Micheal will always be standing at Tactical and never in the XO chair.
You are the one who said dumb terminal so yes I am using that definition. But a smart phone is not like a thin client nor a zero point client either. Smart phones are computers. A thin client accersses a virtual computer somewhere else. My phone is running all the software itself. Even if the phone network goes down the computer still works.
http://www.devonit.com/thin-client-education
I still don't know what you mean by network infrastructure in a box. To me that says a communicator is a LAN or WAN in a tiny box. A communicator is a super powered sub space transmitter. We have no indication if it has a switches, routers, firewalls etc all in the tiny box. I would see no need to.
Anyway I am done with this. I am going back to work in my network engineering job.
You're quite the google warrior, aren't you? If you're actually familiar with this language in the real world you shouldn't be insisting on such narrow Wikipedia-type definitions. Even on the same site (devonit), you'll find such statements as "thin client computing has advanced drastically in the last decade and can today rival traditional PCs in performance"... You're suggesting that because a smartphone is a computer, it can't be a thin client, which is a false dichotomy. All computers are thin when they're running web apps, for instance. Your nitpicking is totally off base and completely misses the point. Which is, simply: the supposed Trek-like capabilities of phones are not actually self-contained, so they aren't comparable to landing party gear.
Thinking too narrow still. Not physical network components wired together in the box, but it can perform the functions of those without separate devices. Kirk can say "Kirk to Spock" and the communicator will not only get that message to Spock all by itself (even if he's on the other side of the planet), it will direct it specifically to Spock as opposed to simply broadcasting it. Think about this for a minute and you'll realize that what we think of as the internet today is totally obsolete in the Star Trek universe.
Last edited:
These statements are only "not true" according to your 5 minutes of google research, not according to my colleagues, stackoverflow, and years of practical experience. But whatever, you do you, Mr. iPhone developer who thinks iPhones are more powerful than communicators and tricorders.
I think this sub-thread should make sense to anyone who was actually following along instead of looking for opportunities to insult and nitpick. In my experience, semantics is the refuge of people who love to argue but have nothing to argue.
I think we are missing the real issue with communicators and tricorders. Do they look cool or not? It's basically the most important thing a prop can do. I don't care if a old school communicator makes 100% common sense. It's what was established in this universe and as long as they make sense inside this universe I am okay with it. I think a retro communicator they have used does look good and it's one thing I love about the new look. It's also the example I wish they had used overall for the entire look. Retro but but still cool looking for a modern audience.
Jason
Jason
I agree with that.. "retro but still cool looking for a modern (and I'll add 'current') audience".
I'd say the better way to ask that question is... when they appear, do they take you out of the scene? From the clips I've seen, I don't think they will.
^ Yet another post with 100% personal insults and zero substance... I think I've learned my lesson. Wish you all the best with your career, Mike.
I think people forget just how little TOS established about its own time period. In the TNG era we know about all the major events affecting the Federation, Klingons and Romulans. Not that it isn't an interesting setting but it gives less story freedom. When I see people say Discovery's setting is limiting it makes me wonder what in particular they're referring to. Other than the fact that Talos is off limits, what do we really know about this setting?
I sincerly don't mean to come off as a jerk so I apologize if I sound combative but if you're going to make a post nemesis so far past that stuff it would feel like your almost ignoring canon, know what I mean ? Like if you're going to ignore what happens and what happened to the romulas thats a HUGE chunk of canon you're just essentially tossing aside or dealing with in throw away lines. To me that's MUCH worse than filling in a missing gap in history like discovery is doing. You're just skipping over the biggest even in the history of the alpha quadrant. I'd feel like I'm being treated like an idiot or that they blew up romulas just because with no thought to consequences. Ironically skipping romulas would make it a perfect candidate for a prequel, which everyone loves. And skipping that and then coming back to it in a prequel means your hemmed in story which then causes more canon problems....it's a whole vicious cycle lol
I think people forget just how little TOS established about its own time period. In the TNG era we know about all the major events affecting the Federation, Klingons and Romulans. Not that it isn't an interesting setting but it gives less story freedom. When I see people say Discovery's setting is limiting it makes me wonder what in particular they're referring to. Other than the fact that Talos is off limits, what do we really know about this setting?
Well, this thread has been murdered...
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll