http://www.treknews.net/2011/10/17/star-trek-tech-is-just-around-the-corner-infographic/
One of my faves!
RAMA
One of my faves!
RAMA
Treknology infograhic
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
I'm always a bit dubious over a lot of these 'Star Trek inspired this and that' ideas.
For example I genuinely think mobile phones would still have turned out just like they have today if Star Trek had never been around. The only logical progression from a corded phone is to have a handheld unit with buttons on and an antenna, then to a unit with a screen and so on. I'm not sure what else a mobile phone could reasonably look like other than the way it turned out, with or without Star Trek.
Same with handheld scanners, stealth-technology that articles like the one shown call 'cloaking' and laser-derived weapons. These things are just a natural progression that have no real link with the show.
I think a lot of what people ascribe to having been 'inspired by Star Trek' would have come about in a virtually identical form if the show had never aired.
SANDOVAL
For example I genuinely think mobile phones would still have turned out just like they have today if Star Trek had never been around. The only logical progression from a corded phone is to have a handheld unit with buttons on and an antenna, then to a unit with a screen and so on. I'm not sure what else a mobile phone could reasonably look like other than the way it turned out, with or without Star Trek.
Same with handheld scanners, stealth-technology that articles like the one shown call 'cloaking' and laser-derived weapons. These things are just a natural progression that have no real link with the show.
I think a lot of what people ascribe to having been 'inspired by Star Trek' would have come about in a virtually identical form if the show had never aired.
SANDOVAL
Well, the guy who developed the first flip phone cited the communicator as an influence. As for all the iPads, iPhones, etc., Steve Jobs was a major league Trekkie, so it's not hard to see the influence there.
I find "inspired" to be an apt word most of the time when discussing Trek tech, as opposed to: "directly leading to"...while a small percentage directly thought of ST when working on a particular piece of tech, in most cases, it probably only occupied a small part of the creative process. I'm sure the first flip phone probably got a passing nod from the creators(the first common/popular flip/clamshell phone was actually called the StarTAC). What's more important is that the flip phone bears little resemblance to the fictional capabilities of the communicator in ST, so the 24th century tech is pretty remarkable for doing so much in such a small size. Obviously in reality the inner workings wouldn't even be close.
I like that they used an Ambassador class ship in the graphics :-)
What is more interesting than these kinds of articles is that a lot of our technology appears to be more advanced than that of Star Trek. Our computers may not be as intelligent, but at least they don't need to reply with chatter in a robotic voice, like they do on TOS. Tricorders may have better sensing capabilities than some of our devices, but even on TNG they were limited to a set of hardcoded buttons instead of configurable touchscreens. Also, TNG, DS9 and ENT have taken the position that the TOS era must be recreated pretty much down to the last set of colorful buttons whenever it appears on another show, so it is difficult to reimagine the universe the way Arthur C. Clarke kept revising his 2001 universe over time, so that by the time the 3001 novel was published, the events of 2001 had been moved to 2031 or so if you pay attention to the dates given in that book. Therefore, when we discuss Star Trek, it is useful to think about the rate of technological progress in that universe vs. the real world. How do we explain their use of CRT screens on TOS tricorders? What about the robotic voice? 
^ Depends if you think those are CRT screens You're correct, the Trek universe isn't exactly like ours so I'd expect that there are some differences that would be known in-universe that we wouldn't necessarily know. If a stranger was viewing our Real Life planet at different stages and saw that still cameras had steadily gotten flatter and flatter as time passed and suddenly we started using the not-flat Lytro lightfield cameras they'd think we took a step backwards.
You're correct, the Trek universe isn't exactly like ours so I'd expect that there are some differences that would be known in-universe that we wouldn't necessarily know. If a stranger was viewing our Real Life planet at different stages and saw that still cameras had steadily gotten flatter and flatter as time passed and suddenly we started using the not-flat Lytro lightfield cameras they'd think we took a step backwards. No, you can't explain everything in TOS by pretending it's something else. Spock just happens to prefer a retro robotic voice, or a retro "typewriter display style" for Mitchell's and Dehner's records? Or maybe the recordkeeper just happens to be a Sam Cogley character who prefers typewriters and microfilm?
Or would it be more correct that Starfleet Command has a preference for retro-robotic during TOS? Afterall, in "Tomorrow is Yesterday" we know the computer voice can be re-programmed to be very natural so it's not a question of capability.
Like how some folks prefer the Kindle's e-Ink display for reading?
I take it typewriters meaning the Courier-like font and microfilm the photo-like representation of paperwork? Perhaps the Starfleet Auditors get on their case about what gets signed off on those PADDs and want proof?
Rather than trying to explain why or why not Star Trek appears to be visually behind in some areas we think we're ahead in, why not just consider Trek a parallel universe where they exhibit Transtator-Punk technology?
Ok, so you're saying that Starfleet by default required its computers to reply in a robotic voice with a lot of unnecessary noise, as opposed to a more natural voice? And by the time of TNG, they decided that the robotic voice and chatter were unnecessary or stylistically undesirable, along with old-style fonts? If we asked Dorothy Fontana, would she reply that yes, this is what Starfleet concerns itself with?
More likely, what we see is what we get. Typewriters are needed because computers in TOS are bulky mainframes which cannot be wasted on such trivial tasks as word processing, despite their artificial intelligence.
More likely, what we see is what we get. Typewriters are needed because computers in TOS are bulky mainframes which cannot be wasted on such trivial tasks as word processing, despite their artificial intelligence.
Sure why not? We have in TOS evidence that their computer tech can sound natural and, as Kirk put it, "affectionate". It's not a technical limitation so what other reasons are there other than a stylistic choice from an in-universe POV?
And Dorothy Fontana was in charge of the Art and/or FX department for the TV Series?
And what we see and what we interpret are different. You see one thing, I see another.
Who had the typewriter in Starfleet?
But the other computer voice was only a temporary aberration, a side-effect of maintenance on another planet. Perhaps their technology was slightly better, but couldn't be adjusted for Starfleet use until some time later. I don't think we saw a typewriter, but we did see a slide graphic computer, which is hardly different. Dorothy Fontana's opinion is relevant because she would be intimately familiar with how devices were intended to work in TOS, and how they had to be revised more or less visibly as real-world technology progressed over the years. Perhaps there was more interest in space travel than in computer technology, so Starfleet basically started with bulky mainframes and expanded them with bits and pieces of alien technology.
I don't think Cygnet 14's tech was better, just that they had a different sensibility that was going on in Starfleet at the time. Like I said before, it doesn't appear to be a technical limitation but a stylistic one from an in-universe POV.
CHRISTOPHER: I take it that a lady computer is not routine.
SPOCK: We put in at Cygnet Fourteen for general repair and maintenance. Cygnet Fourteen is a planet dominated by women. They seemed to feel the ship's computer system lacked a personality. They gave it one. Female, of course.
Nice catch. Does anyone else carry that around since I do remember that Spock was fond of doing all sorts of calculations in his head without using scratch paper/padd. Maybe we caught him double-checking his numbers without going to the computer or he was doing brain exercises?
Sure, as long as the "intended to work" matched up with "how it did work" in TOS.
That's very likely and like "steampunk" but with their electronics and interfaces. That doesn't make them less capable, just rather aesthetically unpleasing. For all we know, in Trek's parallel universe there was no Apple Computer
Rather than trying to explain why or why not Star Trek appears to be visually behind in some areas we think we're ahead in, why not just consider Trek a parallel universe where they exhibit Transtator-Punk technology?
Doesn't Trek have to take place in a parallel universe?
If we were to accept blssdwlf's argument, Kirk would have to allow a lot of 'retro-days' on his starship. They didn't just set-their-com-pu-ters-to-talk-like-this, paper devices are all over the place, with nary a pocket calculator in sight. Do we really want to go down this road, as opposed to discarding a mere assumption that all Star Trek technology has to be more advanced than ours?
I don't think the retro theme makes sense either--though the jury really isn't in on e-ink and the like just yet. That could have been smart paper.
Anyway, I think you have to accept the alternate universe explanation, because there hasn't been a Eugenics war, and we haven't invented a cold sleep technology to preserve the defeat Khan and his followers. To suggest that we'll be sending a manned mission to Saturn before 2050 is optimistic bordering on insane.
Star Trek is no longer a vision of our future, and their timeline definitely doesn't parallel ours anymore. There's no reason to assume or demand a similar tech curve. Their technology, even with TNG is wildly behind ours in certain aspects computing, but they'd obviously solved issues that vex us still (human genetic engineering, surface to orbit costs, cryogenics, for certain).
Anyway, I think you have to accept the alternate universe explanation, because there hasn't been a Eugenics war, and we haven't invented a cold sleep technology to preserve the defeat Khan and his followers. To suggest that we'll be sending a manned mission to Saturn before 2050 is optimistic bordering on insane.
Star Trek is no longer a vision of our future, and their timeline definitely doesn't parallel ours anymore. There's no reason to assume or demand a similar tech curve. Their technology, even with TNG is wildly behind ours in certain aspects computing, but they'd obviously solved issues that vex us still (human genetic engineering, surface to orbit costs, cryogenics, for certain).
To my knowledge, not even the seven-segment display was around in TOS, although it was invented by TWOK.
What that thread points out is from an in-universe POV, a company starting with "J" made a lot of these handheld devices that look like the CSG-1 Flight Computer that we know of from our 60's in TOS. That still doesn't indicate that Trek technology is further ahead or behind than ours as none of your examples are of a "limitation", IMHO.
But if they look like slide graphic calculators, if they are used like slide graphic calculators, the most reasonable conclusion is that they are slide graphic calculators. What else would they be in that context? Recreational antiques in the middle of a serious episode? I don't understand why you prefer the idea of "retro-fashion" on what is supposed to be a functional, semi-military vessel. It just makes TOS look ridiculous.
You're judging the device based on your knowledge of it as a prop. Of course it would look ridiculous like McCoy's salt shakers and the quaint goose-neck viewers. Or the barcode readers stuck on the helm console of JJ Abrams Enterprise.
You could just call them all "suspension-of-belief deal breakers" or consider that in that parallel universe those designs bear resemblance to real world items and work with what we see them do with it on screen. Afterall, how do you know that the "recreational antique" Spock is using wasn't updated to calculate space warp fluctuations along a gravitational gradient or some technobabble and is used as a backup when the computer gets fused in every other tenth episode? Military's tend to like to have old-fashioned backups.
You could just call them all "suspension-of-belief deal breakers" or consider that in that parallel universe those designs bear resemblance to real world items and work with what we see them do with it on screen. Afterall, how do you know that the "recreational antique" Spock is using wasn't updated to calculate space warp fluctuations along a gravitational gradient or some technobabble and is used as a backup when the computer gets fused in every other tenth episode?
Military's tend to like to have old-fashioned backups.Similar threads
