stan@jazz.UUCP (Stan Fisher) (12/28/89)
In article <1267@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >[suggestions for comp.sys.amiga.discussions, c.s.a.hardware,c.s.a.games, and >others deleted] > **more deleted for space sake** > >Personally I like the set up the way it is now. c.s.a and c.s.a.t , and I >think some people are getting a wee bit carried away with all this new group >nonsense. I like c.s.a because it has a variety of subjects, from games to >hardware to new operating systems and more. I don't think there is enough >posting of any one subject to warrant splitting it off to it's own group. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >-- >John Sparks | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 1200bps. Accessable thru Starlink (Louisville KY) >sparks@corpane.UUCP <><><><><><><><><><><> D.I.S.K. ph:502/968-5401 thru -5406 >I'm the person your mother warned you about. Oh, I don't know, what about comp.sys.amiga.discuss.more.groups.of.same? ;^) I agree with John, let's keep what we got and not complicate things. If we spawn yet another group, then I'm still gonna want to read it 'cause it's about my favorite computer, and then more traffic will occur in the Amiga groups overall and then I will have even a harder time keeping up on all the articles about my favorite machine. I figure that if 100 articles are currently coming across the amiga groups now per day (just for arguments sake) and we add another group, I don't think that the portion of that 100 articles will just find it's way into that group for a continued total average of 100. I think we'll see MORE total articles, and personally, I DON'T WANT ANY MORE TRAFFIC. That may be a self centered, selfish reason... but hey, it's mine.:^) I'm for good content, less total numbers and proper direction of postings. Probably if discussions like this one or the one on who sued who in the industry didn't go on and on and on and on, we'd find the traffic volume wasn't so great to even warrent a discussion like this one in the first place. Thanks for the chance to express my opinons, now how about some decent thread to take the place of this one? Stan Fisher - stan@teroach.phx.mcd.mot.com - asuvax!mcdphx!teroach!stan Motorola Microcomputer Division, Tempe, Arizona - Voice (602) 438-3228 Call our User Group BBS "M.E.C.C.A." running Atredes 1.1 @ (602) 893-0804
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (12/29/89)
In <&_F+L.@splut.conmicro.com>, jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard) writes: >Having just read in todays paper that Commodore has decided to >drop the Amiga from its product line up, isn't it about time to >create comp.sys.orphans for it and various other computing flivvers ? > >At the same time we can, I think, safely remove comp.sys.amiga >and .tech. Well, I think you can take your .signature and apply it to the author of the piece in the paper. > | Never ascribe to malice that which can > | adequately be explained by stupidity. -larry -- " All I ask of my body is that it carry around my head." - Thomas Alva Edison - +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
liberato@drivax.UUCP (Jimmy Liberato) (12/30/89)
stan@jazz.UUCP (Stan Fisher) writes: >... >I'm for good content, less total numbers and proper direction of postings. >Probably if discussions like this one or the one on who sued who in the >industry didn't go on and on and on and on, we'd find the traffic volume wasn't >so great to even warrent a discussion like this one in the first place. >... Right! As a reminder to all, Bela Lubkin called for discussion of new amiga related groups in news.groups. I think that if anyone is still interested in this subject they ought to put their opinions into the discussion soon. No amount of further discussion here will bring about any change. -- Jimmy Liberato ...!amdahl!drivax!liberato
cmcmanis@stpeter.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (12/30/89)
In article <&_F+L.@splut.conmicro.com> (Jay Maynard) writes: >Having just read in todays paper that Commodore has decided to >drop the Amiga from its product line up, isn't it about time to >create comp.sys.orphans for it and various other computing flivvers ? No, no, no. It wasn't Commodore, it was Apple Computer! They are dropping the Macintosh line in order to concentrate on the Apple II GS. John Sculley was quoted as saying "Recent downturns in the price of Apple stock and the Xerox litigation have sent a clear signal to management at Apple. Our stockholders have shown us that they want us to return to our roots. And our roots are with the Apple II, our most successful computer to date." In a related annoucement, Apple said that Jean Louis-Gasse was leaving the company to join NeXT and manage the development of the NeXT IIcj computer. This computer is rumored to be a 68040 based, with a single tasking operating system which resembles the Mac OS strongly. Mssr. Gasse was quoted as saying "The 68040 chip is so powerful it can refresh the screen, poll the keyboard, floppy disk, hard disk, and mouse, all in less than a 60th of a second. This level of performance will give users an instantaneous response to their keypresses and mouse clicks." At least that is how I read it. And for those who think I'm being serious, your wrong. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "If it didn't have bones in it, it wouldn't be crunchy now would it?!"
ag@amix.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (12/30/89)
In article <&_F+L.@splut.conmicro.com> jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard) writes: >Having just read in todays paper that Commodore has decided to >drop the Amiga from its product line up You're reading the wrong paper. Pax, Keith What fish wrappage are you reading, anyhow? -- ag@amix.commodore.com Keith Gabryelski ...!cbmvax!amix!ag
" Maynard) (12/30/89)
Having just read in todays paper that Commodore has decided to
drop the Amiga from its product line up, isn't it about time to
create comp.sys.orphans for it and various other computing flivvers ?
At the same time we can, I think, safely remove comp.sys.amiga
and .tech.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jay@splut.conmicro.com (eieio)| adequately be explained by stupidity.
{attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay +----------------------------------------
Here come Democrats...here come Democrats...throwing money a-way..." Maynard) (12/30/89)
In <&_F+L.@splut.conmicro.com>, jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard) DID NOT WRITE: >Having just read in todays paper that Commodore has decided to >drop the Amiga from its product line up, isn't it about time to >create comp.sys.orphans for it and various other computing flivvers ? > >At the same time we can, I think, safely remove comp.sys.amiga >and .tech. The message included above is a forgery. I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in the Amiga line of computers, and could care less about the Amiga groups. I know of no such newspaper article. If I had seen one, I would have cited newspaper, date, and page. Please ignore that forged message. -- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can jay@splut.conmicro.com (eieio)| adequately be explained by stupidity. {attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay +---------------------------------------- Here come Democrats...here come Democrats...throwing money a-way...