fsg@holos0.UUCP (Frank Glass) (08/09/88)
From article <550@pcrat.UUCP>, by rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson): > > Cross posting to .xenix and .microport is needed these days, since > the net Gods have seen fit to provide only these two groups for > 286 and 386 UNIX'es. Where are Bell Tech, ISC, and Venturcom people > to go? How can you discuss the relative merits of each companies > offerings without cross posting? > > With the impending merge of UNIX, it makes more sense to just break > the groups as "i286" and "i386". > I appreciate the fact that SCO people monitor and post to the .xenix group, also that microport is active in the .microport group. Disclaimers notwithstanding, I feel that the postings by people from those organizations provide useful statements of policy and fact. If anything, we should have additional groups for Bell Tech et al. Discussing the merits of a particular product could remain in the specific group. It is unclear that a level discussion of the _relative_ merits can ever take place, with or without cross posting. The last BT vs Microport and UNIX vs Xenix "discussions" of relative merit consisted of many flames, much posturing and generally low signal to noise ratio. Combining vendor factions would only make that sort of thing more likely. On the other hand, seperating i286 and i386 discussions is an idea with some merit, if only because the Rube Goldberg methods of dealing with the segmentation problems of the 286 can be forgotten in 386 implementations. -- Frank Glass Holos Software, Inc. Voice: (404) 496-1358 UUCP: ...!gatech!holos0!fsg
davidsen@steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr) (08/10/88)
In article <1259@holos0.UUCP> fsg@holos0.UUCP (Frank Glass) writes: > With the impending merge of UNIX, it makes more sense to just break > the groups as "i286" and "i386". P L U G There is a mailing list for ALL 386 users and issues, formed because there was not enough separate information for a group just on the 386. It is not limited to any flavor of UNIX or DOS. About 60% of the articles are reposted from the net. To subscribe: 386users-request@TWG.COM -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) (08/13/88)
In article <11801@steinmetz.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >In article <1259@holos0.UUCP> fsg@holos0.UUCP (Frank Glass) writes: >> With the impending merge of UNIX, it makes more sense to just break >> the groups as "i286" and "i386". > > There is a mailing list for ALL 386 users and issues, formed because >there was not enough separate information for a group just on the 386. Probably was a good idea. But the traffic on 386 is much greater now. Seems a bit silly that users of 386 UNIX must use a mailing list or cross post, while users of specific vendors 286 UNIX's have the luxury of a newsgroup. -- Rick Richardson, PC Research, Inc. (201) 542-3734 (voice, nights) OR (201) 389-8963 (voice, days) uunet!pcrat!rick (UUCP) rick%pcrat.uucp@uunet.uu.net (INTERNET)