dma@pcssc.UUCP (Dave Armbrust) (03/07/90)
Because SCO is shipping both unix and xenix it may be to our advantage to change the name of this news group to comp.unix.sco. If that seems unreasonable lets start a new group by that name. Dave Armbrust | uunet!pcssc!dma PC Software Systems | Phone: (813)365-1162 2121 Cornell Street | Sarasota, FL 34237 |
sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) (03/08/90)
In article <206@pcssc.UUCP> dma@pcssc.UUCP (Dave Armbrust) writes: > >Because SCO is shipping both unix and xenix it may be to our >advantage to change the name of this news group to comp.unix.sco. > >If that seems unreasonable lets start a new group by that name. The charter of this group is to discuss Xenix. In it's many flavours on all platforms. SCO UNIX is not Xenix, and is discussed for better or worse in comp.unix.i386. -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca ubc-cs!van-bc!sl 604-937-7532(voice) 604-939-4768(fax) -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca ubc-cs!van-bc!sl 604-937-7532(voice) 604-939-4768(fax)
jim@bahamut.fsc.com (James O'Connor) (03/08/90)
In article <206@pcssc.UUCP>, dma@pcssc.UUCP (Dave Armbrust) writes: > > Because SCO is shipping both unix and xenix it may be to our > advantage to change the name of this news group to comp.unix.sco. SCO is not the only Xenix game in town. And there's probably no reason for an "sco" news group, since we already have comp.unix.i386 for discussion of Unix for 386 machines. ------------- James B. O'Connor Work: jim@tiamat.fsc.com Data Processing Manager Play: jim@bahamut.fsc.com Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc. UUCP: uunet!tiamat!jim
tuck@iris.ucdavis.edu (Devon Tuck) (03/09/90)
In article <206@pcssc.UUCP> dma@pcssc.UUCP (Dave Armbrust) writes: > >Because SCO is shipping both unix and xenix it may be to our >advantage to change the name of this news group to comp.unix.sco. > >If that seems unreasonable lets start a new group by that name. > > I think this is a wonderful suggestion! We would then have a unix group for the well known Xenix package, (comp.unix.xenix), as well as one for SCO Unix, (comp.unix.sco). This makes good logical sense, since SCO is quickly becoming a 'household name' in the PC Unix market, and their ultimate goal is to approach their own highly compatible version of Unix System V. If we are to support two groups, however, we must decide whether we want only SCO Unix specific items discussed on comp.unix.sco, or whetehr we want only SCO Xenix specific items discussed on comp.unix.xenix. If we think long range, we can imagine comp.unix.xenix dwindling in use over the next 5-10 years, while comp.unix.sco should become immensly popular over the next 1-2 years. We can even imagine a comp.unix.sco.{od,desktop,open} emerging for Open-Desktop specific items, and a comp.unix.sco.x for SCO-Xsight, or SCO-Motif specific development issues. If we do create this new group, human nature dictates that the first option will prevail until enough people move to SCO-Unix, and until the amount of SCO-Unix specific discussion greatly overwhelmes SCO-Xenix specific discussion. No matter what happens, I think the one thing we don't want to do is shatter the steady and unchecked flow of general discussion on issues which apply to both systems. Devon Tuck -- tuck@iris.ucdavis.edu
srodawa@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Dr. Srodawa) (03/09/90)
I read the suggestion to be to form the new newsgroup comp.unix.sco and then move the discussion of both xenix and unix SCO products to that new group. That fits the name since both are SCO products. I'm NOT in favor of splittting into a large number of fragmented groups.