jan@ncar.ucar.edu (Jan Isley) (11/26/90)
This has come up once again in unix-pc.general and comp.sys.att.
I can recall at least 4 different long winded discussions over the
years on the pros and cons of merging the unix-pc groups into
comp.sys.att. These disscusions are usually started by a flame fest
because someone did not want unix-pc articles cross posted to the
comp.sys.att group. Go figure.
I do not recall the discussion ever making it to news.groups... until now.
With guidelines in hand, here we go!
CALL FOR DISCUSSION: Creation of comp.sys.3b1
my recommedations are:
Name: comp.sys.3b1
Purpose: Discussion about the 3B1/7300 line of computers.
To include related Convergent Technologies models.
Unmoderated: nuff said.
I think the Purpose line pretty well sums up my idea of a charter for
this group. Now that I have thrown the ball out, I guess that I am
supposed to start off with some rational reasons why we need comp.sys.3b1.
Well, why not. There are lots of people out in the world who have 3b1s.
A great many of us would still not have a UNIX computer at home if it were
not for AT&T's marketing failure and subsequent liquidation of this machine.
It is also on the desks of many thousands of AT&T employees. There is a
large audience for the 3b1 despite the low readership numbers posted for
comp.sys.att and the unix-pc groups.
The unix-pc group and comp.sys.att are the only support many if not all
of these owners are ever going to get. *I* get mail from AT&T employees
looking for help and information and I have never worked for AT&T :)
Imagine calling SUN tech support and getting the following:
"what? you need help with your 3/60. Well, that is not our
current top-of-the-line model so there is not a soul here that
knows anything about them? You really need help? Okay, give
me a charge card number and for $150 an hour you can talk to
someone that maybe can find a manual to read out of to you... etc...
get the picture? No offense intended to SUN, they give us great support.
Just the first example I could think of.
BUT, you have comp.sys.att and unix-pc you say! Well, yes and no.
It is getting harder to wade through the 3b2/6300/386 traffic in sys.att.
There are standing offers from myself and many others to offer a unix-pc
feed to anyone who wants to call, and many "backbone" sites do carry it,
but many do not. There is a large community of 3b1 users in Canada and
Europe that can only get the blessedbyspaf official groups.
WHY NOT comp.sys.att.3b1?
By my reasoning, I am including owners of AT&T sold 7300s, UNIX-PCs, and
3B1s. And, several models sold by Convergent, the actual designers and
builders of the hardware. 3b1 is a little more generic, easier to type,
and resists the next obvious reorganization war:
comp.sys.att.3b2|6300|386|sx|olivetti|intel|etc...
someone else can take that one on.
WHAT ABOUT THE unix-pc. groups?
They can be left in place as far as I am concerned. Cross posted to the
new comp.sys.3b1 or not. I do not see the creation of a mainstream news
group as a reason to dismantle the unix-pc groups. If they are crossposted
it would only help to speed the distribution. Sites that do not carry any
of the alternative groups would stop getting bugged by irate unix-pc owners.
Sites that carry both would suffer no loss. Everybody wins.
WHAT ABOUT unix-pc|comp.sys.3b1.bugs|sources|test|uucp?
There is *not* enough traffic to justify more than one group.
Got some great sources, post them.
SUMMARY
There is a lot of very useful information circulating about these computers
but many people who really need the help cannot get for some very good and
bad reasons. I feel that comp.sys.3b1 would consolidate this information
and get it to the maximum number of people who could benefit from it.
Unix-pc network folks, I see no need to dismantle our little network.
We are connected, lets just try to help out those who are not.
--
Do not suffer the company of fools. | home jan@bagend 404-434-1335
Buddha | known_universe!gatech!bagend!jan