The difference is Austin Powers was set in parts during the 60s, where as Star Trek is supposed to be in the mid 23rd century.
Things like computers which sound like they are typewriters wont stand up today,
And nobody ever claimed they should sound like typewriters, but you know, keep pumping out the bullshit, you might start to believe it yourself.
The simple fact is, that they could have made a bridge, that with a glimpse would seem like the same bridge, and then when you longer at it, you're going, "Holy f! What a bridge!"
A trekkie might react that way to some kind of "faithful" update to the old bridge.
No one else would because the design itself is small, limited and very familiar. And it's not trekkies that these people need to impress.
Ha! I would say that about the uniforms, yet we pretty much got carbon copies of the originals. Indeed, I would have made some subtle changes like added black parts to the side to the uniforms. The reason why Shatner always looked fat, was because of the unbroken color.
The ridiculous iBridge however, looks way too familiar, and extremely limited not to mention blindingly ridiculous as opposed to a functional update to the TOS bridge.
Indeed, I would not make the bridge bigger, I probably would have made a little smaller, make it more cramped, to give the idea of busy place, the nerve center of the starship.
Someone can say Star Trek is ridiculous and someone else can say it isn't, and they'll both be right.
Well, I'd rather that the guy who says Star Trek is ridiculous not be the same guy who's making the next Star Trek, but who knows, it worked pretty well with Ronald D. Moore and Battlestar Galactica.
No, actually, it didn't. nBSG is a big pile of junk. One of the most horrible series, SF or otherwise, to come around in recent times. Only made more glaring by the re-creators constant attempts to make their show look so awesome, and denigrate the original show as a silly pile of junk.
TOS is neither silly, nor campy. That concept right there tells me you're not really a fan of TOS at all. If you consider only 20% of what something has to offer as good, you're saying the large majority of that something is crap. And if the large majority of it is crap, IT is crap. So no, you're not a fan.
You're a fan of something, you'll have consider at the very least 51% of it to be good.
Wow, I didn't realize there was a mathematical formula for figuring out if you're a fan of something! Here I thought it had to do with consistently following and enjoying that entertainment for 35 years of my life!
Seriously, folks, with the "you don't agree with my opinion of this aspect of Star Trek so you're not a real fan" crap - get over yourself.
You can't be a fan of something if you consider it bad. If you consider 80% of it bad, you consider IT bad. In fact, I can't even grasp why anyone would be watching something that is 80% bad, having only a few good things. It's the reason I QUIT watching Enterprise, didn't even bother watching nBSG, stopped watching Stargate ever deteriorating into silly meaningless unserious junk, and quit watching Lost after one season when I released that after the fifth episode it was reduced to something that never pushed the plot forward; in the first 4 or 5 episodes more happened than in the entire season afterward, and no doubt beyond.
You want to be a fan of something, you have to consider a majority of it good, and that means 51%, and I'm thinking if you consider only 51% of something good, you're at best a casual fan, and thus not a fan(atic) at all.
PS - TOS is silly and campy. In fact Star Trek in general is silly and campy. That's one of the many reasons that I love it. I am not only a fan, I'm a second generation fan, and I could probably kick your behind in a Trek trivia contest.
I doubt you'd win, I've won Trek trivia contests, but that's besides the point. Trek is not silly and certainly not campy. You don't seem to understand what campy is. Campy is deliberately making something silly, often taking something that is a little iffy and pushing it way over the top, to get a laugh out of people. Star Trek never did that; humorous episodes aside, they were humorous, not campy. The two not being the same. Star Trek thus was never campy, never ever in its entire run in ANY incarnation.
It may have a few episodes that are silly (I'm looking at you "The Alternative Factor", "Threshold", "Innocence") but having a few silly and ridiculous episodes, does not make the entire thing silly. That's like saying because Star Trek, The X-Files, Stargate, Highlander, etc had a few comedic episodes all of those series were comedies.
Nuh-Uhhhhh! 
Uh-Huhhhh! 
