wolf@garfield.UUCP (Wolfgang Thomeier) (12/07/83)
I would like to propose a new subgroup of net.micro which
would handle all discussions relevant to Tandy/Radio Shack
hardware/software products. This would eliminate the problem of
posting such stuff to multitudes of other groups, thereby decreasing
clutter there and increasing the convenience to those who are
interested in the subject.
As I recall, the Model X's *DO* have a significant proportion of
the micro market, even if some may not wish to admit this.
(or is this outdated, will somebody please clear me up on that???)
My prime candidates for the name of such a group are net.micro.trs{80,},
net.micro.tandy, or net.micro.rs, (in that order) but this list is of
course open to suggestions from any net-landers out there.
How do you feel out there on trsvax? (or anyone for that matter?)
Please post to net.news.group or mail to me at below address.
Wolfgang ('All micros are created equal...') Thomeier
{allegra, ihnp4, utcsrgv}!garfield!wolfjohnc@dartvax.UUCP (John Cabell) (12/12/83)
I think the idea of a net.micro.trs is a good idea. Any
other voters out there?
From the Ever-Questioning Mind of
(And the Owner of A TRS-80)
johnc
:->res@ihuxn.UUCP (12/13/83)
As a TRS-80 Model II owner, I would also like to see a TRS group on the net. Rich Strebendt ...!ihnp4!ihuxn!res
hood@uiucuxc.UUCP (12/15/83)
#R:garfield:-74500:uiucuxc:4500004:000:34 uiucuxc!hood Dec 12 12:19:00 1983 I second the motion.... E. Gray
stephen@alberta (12/15/83)
I also like the Idea of a net.micro.trs...
wolf@garfield.UUCP (Wolfgang Thomeier) (01/04/84)
Since discussion of this has abated somewhat, I would like to
refresh things a bit, hopefully one last time.
It seems that a net.micro.trs80 (or something similar) would benefit
many netlanders out there, and since there is no violent opposition
to creation of such a group the only matters to be resolved before
someone actually creates it are:
(a) The name has not really been agreed on, although
the above is probably reasonable
(b) The question of whether net.micro.6809 should be left
alone, or whether it should be integrated into this
group or made into a subgroup of it has not been resolved
As for the name, I see no reason to use any other than the above.
With regard to (b), either of the two latter choices would seem
to be better than segregating the CoCo (6809) group.
I would like to propose that this group be created soon, as some
people seem to be anxious to end discussion on this once and for all.
Questions, comments, or flames anyone?
Please post to net.news.group.
{allegra, ihnp4, utcsrgv}!garfield!wolf