comp.sys.3b1.*?

[Jay Maynard]

In article <2658 at ttardis.UUCP> rlw at ttardis.UUCP (Ron Wilson) writes:
>How about unix680x0 ?
>This would eliminate the PC in UnixPC, but would be less "esotaric" than
>3b1 (and therefore les likely to inadvertently exclude the CT and Motrola
>systems that the 3b1 is compatable with)
>So:        comp.sys.unix680x0
>           comp.sources.unix680x0

Hate to tell you this, but there are many more Unix systems that run on 680x0s
than just the 3B1 series - the NCR Tower series, for example.

I don't have a real strong opinion here, except to note that there are other
groups that name one machine, but cover others compatible with it - c.s.ibm.pc
and c.s.apple2, off the top of my head. A comp.sys.[att.]3b1 would include
the CT and Motorola compatibles just fine. (I didn't even _know_ there was
a Motorola 3B1-compatible box.)
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard at thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu  | adequately be explained by stupidity.
  "...flames are a specific art form of Usenet..." -- Gregory C. Woodbury