[comp.sys.ibm.pc] New Groups

rat@madnix.UUCP (David Douthitt) (01/23/89)

From article <8090009@hpsemc.HP.COM>, by gph@hpsemc.HP.COM (Paul Houtz):

| From reading this group, you would think it's the only one that
| exists for the IBM PC.
| 
|   My suggestion is that we split it into several groups:
| 
|      1.  comp.sys.ibmpc.turboc
|      2.  comp.sys.ibmpc.os2
|      3.  comp.sys.ibmpc.turbopascal
|      4.  comp.sys.ibmpc.applications
|      5.  comp.sys.ibmpc.hardwarwe
|      6.  comp.sys.ibmpc.clones
| 
|   I don't know.  Maybe these groups stink.  Any other suggestions?

I would take issue with comp.sys.ibmpc.turbopascal and possibly
comp.sys.ibmpc.turboc.  For one thing, let me remind you and the rest
of you IBM Turbo Pascal people that there IS a CP/M based Turbo Pascal
out there.  Also, wouldn't comp.sys.ibmpc.turboc be covered by
comp.lang.c; comp.sys.ibmpc.turbopascal, by comp.lang.pascal; and
comp.sys.ibmpc.os2, by comp.os.os2 (is there such a bird?).

Suggestions 4 through 6 sound good to me.

   -- david

-- 
======== David Douthitt :::: Madison, WI :::: The Stainless Steel Rat ========
FidoNet: 1:121/1 or 1:121/2            {decvax|att}!
UseNet:  ...{rutgers|ucbvax|harvard}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!rat
ArpaNet: madnix!rat@cs.wisc.edu      {uunet|ncoast}!marque!

regoli@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (michael regoli) (01/24/89)

In article <421@madnix.UUCP> rat@madnix.UUCP (David Douthitt) writes:
| From article <8090009@hpsemc.HP.COM>, by gph@hpsemc.HP.COM (Paul Houtz):
| 
| | From reading this group, you would think it's the only one that
| | exists for the IBM PC.
| | 
| |   My suggestion is that we split it into several groups:
| | 
| |      1.  comp.sys.ibmpc.turboc
| |      2.  comp.sys.ibmpc.os2
| |      3.  comp.sys.ibmpc.turbopascal
| |      4.  comp.sys.ibmpc.applications
| |      5.  comp.sys.ibmpc.hardwarwe
| |      6.  comp.sys.ibmpc.clones
| | 
| |   I don't know.  Maybe these groups stink.  Any other suggestions?

well, as has been mentioned, there are already language groups to
cover the above topics: comp.lang.c and comp.lang.pascal.

however, splitting this "ibm.pc" newsgroup into applications,
hardware, and clones will do nothing but encourage cross-postings.  (a
prime example is rec.autos and rec.autos.tech: ninety percent of the
postings to one group can be found in the other.)

maybe the best way to go is "comp.sys.micro.software" and
"comp.sys.micro.hardware."  (note the deletion of the catch-all
"ibm.pc.") *then* perhaps, "comp.sys.micro.hardware.ibm",
"comp...hardware.clones", etc...

this would involve quite a bit of work, though.  think about the other
"micro" groups: comp.sys.tandy, comp.sys.zenith.z100, etc.  we could
incorporate them into comp.sys.micro.tandy, comp.sys.micro.zenith.

i'm probably way off base here but unless a *major* reorganization takes
place within this group, we're just asking to be choked to death by
a flood of cross-postings.

--
                        |
                        |  michael regoli
                        |  ...rutgers!iuvax!silver!regoli
                        |  regoli@silver.bacs.indiana.edu
			|