jdd (04/01/83)
This Monday I suggested the creation of a newsgroup for discussion of Sun
workstations. I posted the suggestion to net.news.group; this followup is
also going to net.micro. I would like to take further comments for another
week and then post a final report.
I have received a fairly small number of replies on the topic, which
suggests that it may be too early for such a group. The replies raised the
following points:
* Some felt that such a group would be too narrow and that we can't give
every machine its own group. This is certainly true: Bill Joy tells me
that there are \92/ companies putting together Unices on 68000s!
* Some suggested that such a newsgroup, if it were to exist, should be in
net.micro.sun. Others suggested net.works.sun or net.works.
* The number of people who would actually contribute to such a newsgroup
seemed to be small.
So, if you have further comments, mail them to me and I will collect and
summarize them in one week.
Cheers,
John ("Self-Appointed Referee") DeTreville
Bell Labs, Murray Hill
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The replies, edited, follow.
----------
I would be interested in a net.sun newsgroup,we are looking at getting one
or two here at foxboro.
----------
Isn't there already a newsgroup about workstations? Or is that a fa. group?
Anyhow, if not, I'd vote for it to go in net.micro.sun .
----------
I vote for net.micro.sun.
----------
My first reaction is to keep SUN discussions in net.works. This is where
I've always found SUN information before, and that is where I still look to
keep current.
On the other hand, I see nothing philosophically wrong with a special
purpose group. The WorkS digest started out as the Apollo bulletin board.
Even now, WorkS happily co-exists on the Arpanet with Info-BitGraph, a
digest for a particular system.
I would like to see more on the workstations that run Berkeley's VAX Unix,
and suggest that, if net.works is too general, a net.works.4bsd be created.
----------
I think it's too narrow. We're gonna get into trouble is we start (or
continue) to give each individual PC/micro its own group. Look at all the
net.micro subgroups; most are hardly ever used (with the exception of pc and
atari)
In any case, my vote is no. However, if it does come down to creating it, I
think net.micro.sun is better than net.sun
----------
John - while I support the newsgroup (and wish I could get a sun) I think
net.sun is far too narrow. What about CadLinc? Apollo? HP? Metheus?
Etc? I'd be inclined to say net.ws.sun, but there is already an fa.works
which does this kind of thing. (The gateway appears to be dead, but I saw
somebody at OSU mailing himself an archive from last fall and it seemed to
be teeming.) This leads me to suggest net.works, and eventually
net.works.sun if subdivision eventually happens.
----------