posted
Looks like Paramount refurbished the Startrek.com web site with a face lift. It was unveiled July 31, but only saw it for the first time today. Looks like dark grey has replaced the black and its certainly flashier.
I don't know if I like new slider bar navigation on some pages though, I would have preferred to click on the section I want directly, however unelegant it was. The ews and ahs lasted a whole two seconds.
I cannot tell yet if they actually spent some time correcting some of the inaccuracies in the previous version of the web site.
If would have also been nice to have portraits of the characters, aliens, and starships they discuss in the library section. But then why would we shell out the big bucks when the Okudas come out with the fourth edition of the Star Trek Encyclopedia?
What do others think of the updated site? Do you think its an improvement or should they have left it alone and spent the time producing updated content?
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
What fourth edition of the Encyclopedia? That line has been abandoned by Pocket Books...
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
What is it with commercial site and their obsessive use of Flash and Java(script)? Text links load faster, are a million times more useful and can be almost as 'good looking'.
Overall impression: Boring clich� commercial design and a bit overloaded with pointless graphics and Flash. But, unlike most commercial sites, with a lot of decent to good content. A 7 out of 10.
posted
MinutiaeMan I was under the impression that Pocket Books wasn't interested in publishing straight technical manuals for a while like the one for TNG and DS9.
If Enterprise turns around and becomes popular, I imagine that Pocket will change its tune. Although if they are going to continue to produce wretched books like the Star Trek Voyager Companion and the disappointing and incomplete Star Trek: Starship Spotter, they should just leave it alone and not bother. I don't understand why Pocket Books found it necessary to ruin all of the rendered ship portraits by printing them on two pages. Unless they were motivated to defeat most of the scanners out there. Also the editor of that book should be shot, too many spelling errors in that book and incorrect term usage. Starfleet Corp of Engineers? Corps is spelled with an s. Next time Pocket should hire someone with a little knowledge of Trek to edit the book.
Harry: The web developers at Paramount probably needed to add Flash and Java script experience to their resumes and needed new portfolio pieces. I guess simplicity isn't good enough anymore. Everything now has to have distracting Flash animations everywhere. Blecch.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Triton, it's not just the technical manuals -- it's ANY Trek-related reference books. Stuff like "Starship Spotter" and "Star Charts" included. Pocket Books did such a bad job of it that no one bought them, so they're not selling them any more.
I'm ashamed to say that I did buy the 3rd edition of the Encyclopedia, but that was only because I didn't realize that they'd just put the new material in a lazy-ass addendum in the back. Boy, was I pissed about THAT!
quote:I guess simplicity isn't good enough anymore. Everything now has to have distracting Flash animations everywhere. Blecch.
Not always. Just scroll down a bit and check out Star Trek Minutiae's brand-new website design. I actually took OUT my JavaScript!
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I agree, the "Supplement" section in the third edition of the Star Trek Encyclopedia was pretty lazy. They did not want to give too many hours to the contractor who did the desktop publishing for the book. I doubt the Okudas did the desktop publishing and the blue line galley checks for the third edition.
To some extent Pocket Books have only themselves to blame. They super-saturated the market with mediocre and plain poor content.
Its inexcusable the number of spelling errors there are in Starship Spotter. Don't they spell check after doing the desktop publishing or do blue line galley proofs? Do they think that we are bunch of young fan boys who won't know the difference and buy everything with the Star Trek logo?
I was really looking forward to Starship Spotter, and it was such a disappointment. Why do we get only one render per ship and one wire frame mesh? Why didn't we get a book with the same dimensions as the rest of the "technical" Trek books and more renders? Or how about some behind the scenes information about the design of the ship or how Foundation Imaging created the computer models?
I really hope that the tide will turn with season 3 of Enterprise and Trek can go back on track and be successful again.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Starship Spotter was a stopgap project for Mojo as he was working on Unseen Frontier (this was before I came to the project). It was quite hastily assembled, and it obviously does show. Also, they used a guy for the tech writeups (Alex R.) whose bias towards TOS-era tech wasn't the best mesh for the mostly TNG book, IMO.
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: Starship Spotter was a stopgap project for Mojo as he was working on Unseen Frontier (this was before I came to the project). Mark
...and yet, The Unseen Frontier was scrapped too was'nt it? I sure as hell waited long enough in anticipation of that book....(sigh!)
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Can you please explain what your role was on the project? My apologies if you have already discussed this, but I am interested in how these projects come about and then make it to press. Is The Unseen Frontier dead or on hiatus, or can you not comment because you are under contract or under terms of a non-disclosure agreement?
I guess I shouldn't be so critical of the people writing the books, they are only human. Printing errors and spelling mistakes can and do occur. And its really annoying to find them after reviewing the material several times and only seeing it when it comes back from the printer and 500 copies have been printed on a 1200 dot linotronic printer and the book has been perfect bond with a unit cost of $20.00 a piece. The horror!
Sorry, I am a perfectionist and I'm a tough audience. I imagine that most of the printing, book dimensions, and page count decisions were out of the hands of "Mojo", Alex, and the other contributors and rested exclusively with Pocket Books. Pocket was also probably responsible for the final desktop publishing and galley proof editing and perhaps the authors never got a chance to see it for a final check before it went to the printers. Its too late to worry about it after you've printed several thousand copies. They certainly wouldn't want to shred them, fix the error, and reprint them all. Sometimes you just have to live with good enough when large sums are involved. Just hope that there is a second printing to fix the mistakes.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
quote: To some extent Pocket Books have only themselves to blame. They super-saturated the market with mediocre and plain poor content.
Examples? The "nonfiction" Star Trek book market took a nosedive beginning with the spectacular failure of the Enterprise D blueprints, which, while not perfect, I would hardly describe as "plain poor."
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
"Do they think that we are bunch of young fan boys who won't know the difference and buy everything with the Star Trek logo?"
I think you've answered your own question. B)
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
Although certainly Pocket Books bears the ultimate blame, seeing as they're the ones who market their products anyway, I can't help but wonder if it's people like us, who have been spreading so much of the reference material across the Internet, that are also killing the "nonfiction" (yet still fictional) Trek books.
After all, if there are such excellent sources out there as Ex Astris Scientia, Federation Starship Datalink, TrekMania, and others... then why shell out $50 for the Encyclopedia when you can find any of the info you need on the Internet for free?
Please note that I'm not suggesting that fan websites are the sole -- or even primary -- cause of the demise of the Trek reference books... but I do wonder how much of an affect they might have had.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Its inexcusable the number of spelling errors there are in Starship Spotter.
I found most annoingly was that someone wasn't able to count the phaser strips correctly.
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
I guess simplicity isn't good enough anymore. Everything now has to have distracting Flash animations everywhere. Blecch.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
