comp.sys.3b1.*?

[Ron Wilson]

In article <1990Nov29.164822.20601 at hayes.ims.alaska.edu>, floyd at hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) writes:
>In article <36335 at cup.portal.com> thad at cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes:
>>das at trac2000.ueci.com (David Snyder) in <942 at trac2000.ueci.com> writes:
>>>
>>>I agree 100%.  We MUST get rid of the reference to "unix-pc".
>>
>>Hmmm.  One person during our AT&T Users' Group meeting this evening shared
>>his thoughts about the matter, and he presented a compelling case to NOT
>>give up the "UNIXPC" name because then the 8088/8086/80286/80386/80486 users
>>would snatch up "UNIXPC" for themselves and then suffer massive infusions
>>of cross-postings by US, whose machines are labelled "AT&T  UNIXPC" !  :-)
>>
>   [ statements perceived (:-) as fact deleted ]
>>
>>Now for some of MY opinions:
>>
>>5) so now we focus our attention on what the <???> in comp.sys.<???> and
>>   comp.sources.<???> should be named.
>>  [ ... ]
>>   And recent posts have shown that owners/users of Motorola and Miniframe
>>   systems are NOT ignorant and have found "our" present hierarchy.  And
>>  [... ]
>
>This is a very good point.  I don't think the name  needs to indicate 
>clearly and precisely  what the group covers.  Those looking for this info 
>KNOW what they are looking for.  By the same token, the name should NOT
>attract those who *don't* know what they are looking for.
>
>>   This leaves us with the other extant identifiers "UNIXPC" and "3B1".  The
>>   BYTE Magazine system review (May 1986) was headlined "The AT&T UNIXPC".
>>   All documents of any consequence refer to the system as UNIXPC.  All use
>>   I've seen of "3B1" has been only in this newsgroup, though I often refer
>>   to the system as "3B1/UNIXPC/PC7300" in other newsgroups.  Some people have
>>   told me they LIKE the "snob" appeal of "3B1" since it appears to be a REAL
>>   computer contrasted with a "PC";  different strokes for different folks.
>>
>>   My suggestion is we KEEP the label "UNIXPC" since it clearly identifies the
>>   system as a desktop UNIX workstation, in fact, one of the first affordable
>>   ones, and NOT let the label drop to be picked up later by some other
>>   special interest group.  I haven't seen any great volume of material
>>   posted to unix-pc.* from the DOS-based world, thus I don't perceive any
>>   problem since I'm sure many have chastised the "offenders" via email.
>
>NO. NO. NO.  Total disagreement.
>
>The problem with putting 'pc' in the name is bad now.  I find it annoying,
>and it appears many people do.  It is going to get worse.  And worse,
>and worse again.   It is never going to get better.  That is a fact of 
>life.  Way up at the top Thad references concern about Intel oriented
>folks "snatching" up the title UNIXPC if we let it go.  Hell, its gone.
>Forget it.  Lets just save ourselves the confusion and dump it.
>[...]
>Name it in such a way that it reduces the confusion.  No
>reference to 'PC' is worth it.  '7300' isn't too clear either.
>'3b1' seems the best thing suggested, but I'd certainly go along
>with anything better.  Just that I haven't thought of or heard
>of anything better yet.
>>
>>   So, in summary, I'm proffering:
>>
>>	comp.sys.unixpc, and
>>	comp.sources.unixpc
>I would vote no on that, but yes to almost anything else.  I'll
>vote no on *any* name with 'pc' in it.

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


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
About MS-DOS: "... an OS originally designed for a microprocessor that modern
                kitchen appliances would sneer at...."
                   - Dave Trowbridge, _Computer Technology Review_, Aug 90

                                     iwblsys\
rlw at ttardis	    uunet!rel.mi.org!cfctech!ttardis!rlw
                sharkey.cc.umich.edu/
    rel.mi.org is currently sick - back in 2 weeks.