I couldn't give a good gobdamn to the people who bitch about continuity (something that the Trek franchise has a hard time keeping straight to begin with).
I'll admit that at some point people need to realize that concessions must inevitably be made if you're gonna get twenty-something episodes per season out of an established franchise. the only real problem I had with enterprise was that they approached the trek the same way I often approached our vanguard stories back in the day: "holy shit I've got an awesome idea! I'm gonna work this in here whether it meshes with the rest of the story or not!" they were just trying so damn hard to outdo absolutely everything that came before that crucial elements of the franchise's conceptual and even literal aesthetic were disregarded. I dislike the continuity abuses because I see them as a
symptom, not as the disease itself - the creators of enterprise were so focused on telling
their stories that they didn't seem to go to very great lengths to make them
star trek stories. when abrams cranked out the reboot, there were plenty of aesthetic and storytelling concessions made (though the
back to the future 2-esque 'alternate timeline' explanation excuses any potential continuity errors), but abrams was careful to respect everything that came before and in the end was always striving to keep that story a
star trek story.
