Xref: utzoo news.groups:32317 comp.sys.handhelds:8061
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!pacbell.com!decwrl!pa.dec.com!hollie.rdg.dec.com!ryn.mro4.dec.com!ultnix.enet.dec.com!taber
From: taber@ultnix.enet.dec.com (Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: Split of comp.sys.handhelds: a straw poll
Message-ID: <4949@ryn.mro4.dec.com>
Date: 23 May 91 12:17:13 GMT
References: <22301@duke.cs.duke.edu> <MATT.91May22113639@physics16.berkeley.edu>
Sender: guest@ryn.mro4.dec.com
Reply-To: taber@ultnix.enet.dec.com (Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: KC1TD@KB4N.NH.USA.NA.EARTH.SOLAR_SYSTEM.UNIVERSE.MIND_OF_GOD.01463
Lines: 63

In article <MATT.91May22113639@physics16.berkeley.edu>,
matt@physics16.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern) writes:
|>> I support the split proposal. [i.e., create comp.sys.calculators
|>and
|>> copy.sys.palmtops] If there appears to be a disproportionate number
|>of
|>> hp48 postings within the calculators group then we can work out a
|>> sensible subdivision.
|>
|>But can anyone doubt that that will be the case?  In the last month,
|>I
|>don't think I've seen any postings at all on any calculator but the
|>hp48 and the hp28.  For every posting about some other calculator, I
|>see 100 about the 28/48.  
|>

But is that bad?  It's apparently bad right now for the palmtop owners. 
But if they have their own group, now is the HP48/HP28 traffic bad?  Is
there a disenfranchised crowd of other calculator owners out there?

|>I really don't think I'm exaggerating that number.
|>
|>The way I look at it, a "calculators" newsgroup will be an hp48
|>newsgroup in everything but name---so why not make the name accurately
|>reflect the contents?
|>

Well, over the lifetime of the comp.sys.handhelds group there have been
several "sweetheart" calculators.  All of them were from HP, but I don't
think that has a bearing.  This is a group of people who USE their
calculators and take them seriously.  HP is really the only company that
takes their needs to heart.  But if Casio or TI suddenly decided to get
serious, there's nothing that would lead me to believe that the group
wouldn't switch manufacturers as fast as they switch models. (And the
changeovers from the 41 to the 28C, 28C to 28S, 28S to 48 were pretty
darn fast.)

The point is, having a most popular model doesn't mean that the group is
not interested in handhelds of all types.  Nor does a preponderance of
traffic in the group for a single model mean that there should be a
split on that model IF IT IS GOING TO LEAVE THE GROUP VIRTUALLY EMPTY.

If the 48 got tossed out before this proposal, the palmtop people
planned to live on in the vacated group.  But if the palmtop people move
to their own group, and the 48 people move out, who's left?

|>My proposal, then: a quick, informal straw poll.  Send me a brief
|>message telling me which proposal you like better, and I'll summarize
|>for the net in a few days.  With any luck, there will be some sign of
|>a consensus one way or another.
|>

Funny how these things happen -- I had just agreed with Jeff Mandel to
conduct a poll to see if we could show if there was consensus around a
name so we could cut to the chase and call for votes.  I hate to
duplicate work, but I think your scheme has too many degrees of freedom
to draw a solid conclusion from.
--
                                             >>>==>PStJTT
                                     Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber,
KC1TD

Those who think, write. Those who can't, spell.