It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Whose tech is better: 'Star Trek' or 'Star Wars'?

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Isn't that the point of the OP?




posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Okay Star trek is the future and Star wars is a long time ago so the star wars tech now is going to be mind boggling.
So my bet is Star Wars.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


I didn't author the thread.
I just pointed out two sources...relatively credible ones at that...that supported the notion that SW tech was superior to ST.
I chose no side in doing so.
I like both and choose neither one over the other.
You made two faulty assumptions on the tech and I pointed out (to the best of my knowledge) where you were mistaken...the transporter and time travel analogy having equivalents in SW.
I only knew of them at all because my friend ran a comic book store and the die-hards you refer to would argue the finer points of it (and any other fanboy-related trivia on any hobby related topics you could name) ad-infinitum 24-7.
I personally think the EP I-III sucked harder than everything Kristen Stewart has ever been in combined. Hayden and Jake's acting as the pre-sith Vader were atrocious...mostly making want to leave the theatre as badly as I did during Star Trek V or either of the Abram's abominations.
I'm just here for the coffee and donuts...

-Live Long and Prosper-
edit on 23-1-2014 by Eryiedes because: Correction



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:11 AM
link   
People like Star Wars better then Star Trek hands down, remember the petitions for the Death Star and Enterprise?
35,000 people signed the Death Star petition, compared to the 7000 signers for the Enterprise petition



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:38 AM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


that petition only indicates that teenies like starwars, grown ups couldn't give a rats in the starwars versus star trek debates. Star trek beats starwars hands down it is a human quest, starwars is just kids shoot em ups.
edit on 24-1-2014 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Iam nearly 40 and I like both but Star Wars edges it for me.
When I was a kid It was all Star wars and it has continued into adulthood, I wouldn't be the same person without Star Wars.
It is all about personal choice..some like Star Wars and some like Star Trek better but I guess the numbers do not lie and If it was voted on....Star wars wins.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Eryiedes
 


I didn't make faulty comparisons, you twisted my words. There is no matter transporters in star wars, that what I said and I was right.

If you want to compare tech between both universes the closest tech your will find is the ST hand phaser and SW blasters.
The original startrek it is explained that a hand phaser on a maximum setting will disintegrate a brick wall. In one episode a man holds off hundreds of a planet primitive savages rushing him because its a powerful continuous beam and he sweeps the area. Starwars hand blasters cant do that.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


The numbers lol you kidding I wasn't on that poll like millions of others who weren't. You may be surprised if every one in world was polled that startreks kicks starwars butt. Starwars is shoot em ups for kids, nothing more and nothing less.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Nope Star wars wins....Just look at the box office sales for Trek v Wars and Wars beats it hands down.

whatculture.com...



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 08:26 AM
link   

boncho
The Jedi would destroy the Borg. Machines aren't that useful when they are in a crumpled heap on the floor from Jedi mind smash...

I should add, look how one Jedi can take out an army of droids. I see the SW campaign as guerrilla type warfare. USS Enterprise shows up, no ones home, they were tricked. A cith sneaks on board. End game...
edit on 16-5-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)


Too simple of a comparison.

First off, the Borg are some of the scariest villains of all time.


They have a collective conscious, what one sees, they all see. Because of that, they quickly adapt, change tactics, and quickly develop a new defense.

If you ever saw the introduction of the Borg, you would know that. By the 5th Borg killed, they would of developed a drone that could shield against the light saber.

And I doubt you could mind meld with the entire collective that has the information obtained from all the species they have assimilated.

comparing drones to the Borg is like comparing a scooter to a Porsche.

Sorry, but the handful of Jedi would be assimilated within the hour.
edit on 24-1-2014 by nixie_nox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


you do realise that starwars the average age cinema audience is about 13. The bulk of cinema goers to sci fi movies are teenies. The box office receipts don't mean a lot in that context. Ok, the context is this that adults prefer star trek over star wars. If you want to reamin a child all your life that's your choice. Starwars is shoot em ups for kids, it doesn't explore social phenomenon like trek, trek is sophisticated, star wars is bright lights and effects. Im sorry but that's the truth of it.
edit on 24-1-2014 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2014 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Star wars has made a religion.
I will remain a child where Star Wars is concerned It brings back memories of me and my Bro when we were little.
Neither of us is wrong like I said it is opinion you are a trekkie nerd Iam a star wars nerd.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


I was a kid when starwars came out and looking back I can see what made me like it was the fact it was like action flick in space. Now looking at the new star trek movies and seeing how JJ abrahms how he has turned the new trek into a starwars type movie, and has done away with the deep exploration and examination of the human psyche themes (the foundation of the original trek), I realised why I can never like starwars over star trek. Starwars was and will always be bubble gum sci-fi, its superficial. For older people who staunchingly defend starwars they are only really defending Nostalgia of the starwars as they experienced it through their child vision.

Also star trek if it can head back to its original theme has enough flexibility in its stories to last much longer than starwars. The fact there has been many spin of series of startrek can attest to that. A starwars Tv series could never be made, as its so superficial that people would get sick of it in months. This is why a starwars TV series has and never will be made. The thing that really hurts star wars a lot is the universe resolves around about 5 people, who themselves have very limited characterisation.
edit on 24-1-2014 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 04:56 PM
link   

AthlonSavage
reply to post by Eryiedes
 


There is no matter transporters in star wars, that what I said and I was right.


But there is matter transportation in SW.
It's just not technically-based.
Sounds more like semantics.


If you want to compare tech between both universes the closest tech your will find is the ST hand phaser and SW blasters. The original startrek it is explained that a hand phaser on a maximum setting will disintegrate a brick wall. In one episode a man holds off hundreds of a planet primitive savages rushing him because its a powerful continuous beam and he sweeps the area. Starwars hand blasters cant do that.


Sir, that is just not true and if you went to Stardestroyer.net you'd find that turbo-laser technology (blasters) are far superior to ship mounted phasers.

"Heavy turbolasers release many gigatons of energy per shot, while light turbolasers release dozens of megatons of energy per shot. A Star Destroyer carries more than a hundred light turbolasers and dozens of heavy turbolasers. The Death Star (a massive compound turbolaser) releases more energy than the Sun produces in over seven thousand years! We also have ion cannon technology, which they lack."

"Their phasers appear to induce some kind of chain reaction in matter. Against shields, they seem to be tactically equivalent to lasers in the range of 30,000 TW (7 megatons per second). Against dense armour, their effectiveness is much lower, in the 1-10TW range (1 kiloton per second). A typical starship has only a handful of phaser arrays."

Once more, I have no stake in this arguement...you're just wrong.

-Peace-



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Eryiedes
 






But there is matter transportation in SW.
It's just not technically-based.
Sounds more like semantics.


In this thread we are comparing star trek tech with star wars tech, are we not? The transporters on startrek are common based technology which many space civilisations have access to. If a fleet of starwars star destroyers met with a fleet of Startrek starships, the starships can beam missles or troops aboard the imperial craft. The non technically based transport method you refer to is not a common based technology, and could not be applied in a practical and fast, repeatable manner as the startrek transporters.





Sir, that is just not true and if you went to Stardestroyer.net you'd find that turbo-laser technology (blasters) are far superior to ship mounted phasers.



Your twisting my words again. I used example of hand held phasers compared to hand held blasters because they are the best comparable one for one items that we see used a lot in both SW and ST. The hand held phaser owns the hand held blasters its not even a close contest.


edit on 24-1-2014 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   

AthlonSavage
In this thread we are comparing star trek tech with star wars tech, are we not? The transporters on startrek are common based technology which many space civilisations have access to. If a fleet of starwars star destroyers met with a fleet of Startrek starships, the starships can beam missles or troops aboard the imperial craft. The non technically based transport method you refer to is not a common based technology, and could not be applied in a practical and fast, repeatable manner as the startrek transporters.


In SW their version is as fast as the speed of thought...it doesn't get any faster.
It can also function through shields.
It's also flawless and infinte.
Trek's however could get you dead for any number of reasons.
Doesn't sound so superior to me.


Your twisting my words again. I used example of hand held phasers compared to hand held blasters because they are the best comparable one for one items that we see used a lot in both SW and ST. The hand held phaser owns the hand held blasters its not even a close contest.


No I didn't twist anything.
I am talking about the base technology as you requested...and the technology behind it has numbers which state you are wrong. I'm sorry that melts your motherboard.

-Peace-
edit on 24-1-2014 by Eryiedes because: Addition

edit on 24-1-2014 by Eryiedes because: Forgot Something



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Eryiedes
 


Startreks better na na !!!



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


If it helps you sleep at night then so be it.

-Peace-



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Eryiedes
 


I do sleep well at night knowing Starwars is a space soap opera for the less intellectually challenged.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Better tell Disney that...they are planning a tv show.




top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join