Xref: utzoo news.groups:23010 comp.windows.ms:4262 comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:9020 Path: utzoo!mnetor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!iuvax!maytag!mks.com!andy From: andy@mks.com (Andy Toy) Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.windows.ms,comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Subject: Re: comp.binaries.* proposals Message-ID: <1990Aug15.160910.1991@mks.com> Date: 15 Aug 90 16:09:10 GMT References: <1990Aug6.175005.25909@edison.cho.ge.com> <15811@s.ms.uky.edu> Reply-To: andy@mks.com (Andy Toy) Followup-To: news.groups Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada Lines: 24 phoenix@ms.uky.edu (R'ykandar Korra'ti) writes: >rja writes: >>Formal Proposal: >>old name: comp.binaries.ibm.pc comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d >>new name: comp.binaries.msdos comp.binaries.msdos.d > I think this makes a lot of sense. After all, more non-IBM machines >run MS-DOS than IBM machines do; and once (and assuming) that OS/2 starts >moving along, the current group names would be confusing to the first-time >user. Agreed. comp.binaries.ibm.pc is too ambiguous since there could be binaries for DOS, OS/2, AIX, UNIX, Minix, Coherent, MS-Windows, etc... All of these OS run on IBM PC/AT/XT/RT. Almost all of the postings are not even IBM PC specific (i.e. they will run on most MS-DOS machines). I think that naming the group along OS lines is better than by company and product name in this case. Also there has been mention in comp.windows.ms about MS-Windows binaries. Discussing creation of comp.binaries.mswindows may also be appropriate at this time. -- Andy Toy, Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Internet: andy@mks.com 35 King Street North, Waterloo, UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!andy Ontario, CANADA N2J 2W9 Phone: 519-884-2251 FAX: 519-884-8861