Xref: utzoo news.groups:19065 comp.unix.xenix:10801 comp.unix.i386:3813 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!pcssc!dma From: dma@pcssc.UUCP (Dave Armbrust) Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.unix.xenix,comp.unix.i386 Subject: Re: New group comp.unix.sco Message-ID: <212@pcssc.UUCP> Date: 28 Mar 90 06:34:03 GMT References: <209@pcssc.UUCP> <1990Mar26.213809.26999@ico.isc.com> Followup-To: news.groups Organization: PC Software Systems Corp. Lines: 138 In article <9003271338.AA14014@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us> >While I think xenix is different enought to warrant a group, sco's Sys V >is so similar that comp.unix.i386 covers it. I have had several responses since the call for discussion stating that they did not realize that comp.unix.i386 is for all 386 Unix versions. For this reason comp.unix.xenix gets postings that would be better posted in comp.unix.i386. The people that do realize this appear to post into both groups. It is my hope that having the group comp.unix.sco will cut down on the unnecessary cross posting. In article <1990Mar26.213809.26999@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) Organization: Interactive Systems Corporation, Boulder, CO >dma@pcssc.UUCP (Dave Armbrust) suggests a new group comp.unix.sco. >> This group would be intended for postings regarding all products >> from Santa Cruz Operations; Including but not limited to SCO >> Xenix, SCO Unix, Xsight, (ODT) Open Desk Top, Lyrix, VP/ix, SCO >> Professional, etc. > >There are already newsgroups suitable for the intended purposes. Xenix- >specific discussions can go in comp.unix.xenix. UNIX-specific discussions >(referring to the AT&T-based V.3 product) can go in comp.unix.i386. Yes UNIX-specific discussions should continue to go to comp.unix.i386 when they apply to all 386 UNIX operating systems installations. But what about the other products I mentioned that can be used under SCO Xenix and SCO Unix. >Discussions which overlap the two (such as the common questions about >"should I buy Xenix or UNIX?") are most logically cross-posted to the two. No, this most logically belongs in comp.unix.sco and should not get a cross posting. SCO sells both products and this group is most likely to be aware of the differences. >The major difficulty I see with adding an SCO-specific group is that there >are many discussions which really apply to various vendors of 386 systems. >To the extent that the discussions bear on SCO UNIX, I expect we'd see a >lot of cross-posting, since their base code and VP/ix is based on the same >code used by the other vendors in that arena. Most discussions are for specific implementations of UNIX/Xenix, if a posting is regarding a SCO UNIX or Xenix installation it could be better served under comp.unix.sco. Rarely do you see a posting that does not mention what flavor of UNIX they have. Why is this? It is because it makes a difference. In the rarer case where it relates to ALL 386 UNIX installations then this would be valid time to cross post. >To the extent that SCO discussions apply to a variety of unrelated >products, I feel it's a bad precedent to set up new manufacturer-oriented >groups instead of discussing by topic...I'd really not want to see >comp.unix.isc, comp.unix.esix, comp.unix.intel, comp.unix.att, come out >of this. I do not want to see comp.unix.vpix, comp.unix.lyrix, comp.unix.xsight, comp.unix.odt, comp.unix.professional either. All these products (with the exception of ODT) will run on both SCO Xenix and SCO Unix. The only logical thing to do without this group is to cross post to comp.unix.xenix and comp.unix.i386. >> ...there is confusion to where posting regarding >> SCO products should be posted. > >I haven't seen any confusion in comp.unix.i386. Perhaps it exists in >comp.unix.xenix for historical reasons, but that confusion will resolve >itself as SCO's UNIX product becomes better known. Moreover, that same >temporary confusion would exist with any new group. You have not seen any confusion because you are from Interactive Systems Corporation. The logical place to post for interactive 386 system is in comp.unix.i386. You do not offer a Xenix product. The confusion will grow as SCO sells more and more UNIX systems. In article <260EB8FF.1707@telly.on.ca> evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) >>This group would be intended for postings regarding all products >>from Santa Cruz Operations; Including but not limited to SCO >>Xenix, SCO Unix, Xsight, (ODT) Open Desk Top, Lyrix, VP/ix, SCO >>Professional, etc. > >Xenix is dealt with in comp.unix.xenix Yes, this is clear. >Unix is dealt with in comp.unix.i386 A lot of people are not aware of this. If they are they will post to both comp.unix.i386 and comp.unix.xenix. >Lyrix is dealt with in comp.text Most probably would get 3 cross posting comp.text, comp.unix.xenix and if they understand comp.unix.i386 this will get a posting too. >ODT and Professional have not generated much traffic at all. >To make matters more confusing, two of the products you mentioned is not >even originally SCO's. Xsight (from Locus) and VP/ix (from one of SCO's >competitors, Interactive) are sold by many other vendors and are >sometimes even known by other names (AT&T Simultask comes to mind), but >questions about these products certainly extends beyond SCO users alone. I am not sure where you are suggesting to post ODT, Professional, Xsight or VP/ix questions. Let not have separate groups for all these products. You will not have to have a SCO license before you can join comp.unix.sco lets leave it open for all! >Just about anything someone would post to this group would have >to be cross-posted somewhere else in order to get the best hit. I disagree the best hit would be comp.unix.sco for SCO products. >>Most posting for SCO are currently being posted under >>unix.comp.xenix. This group is for posting regarding all Xenix >>systems not just SCO. SCO is currently shipping SCO Unix >>which is no longer called Xenix. > >However, SCO Xenix is still a popular product, and there sill continue >to be Xenix-specific postings for some time to come. There is some confusion to what I previously posted. I do not want the group comp.unix.xenix removed. This is still a popular product from many companies and because of the differences should have a separate group. >SCO Unix is far more similar to other comopany's 386 Unix implementations >than SCO would like you to think. Your signature says it better. >First they built the world's >standard...then they added >standards no-one else had--SCO ap ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Armbrust | uunet!pcssc!dma PC Software Systems | Phone: (813)365-1162 2121 Cornell Street | Sarasota, FL 34237 |