Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcrware!jejones
From: jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m6809
Subject: Re: NEW GROUP - comp.sys.coco
Message-ID: <556@mcrware.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 14-Nov-87 23:42:05 EST
Article-I.D.: mcrware.556
Posted: Sat Nov 14 23:42:05 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Nov-87 20:49:32 EST
References: <4096@watdcsu.waterloo.edu> <3782@pucc.Princeton.EDU> <3825@pucc.Princeton.EDU>
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Ia.
Lines: 27
Summary: Sorry, but I can't resist...

-------------------------------
In article <3825@pucc.Princeton.EDU>, EWTILENI@pucc.Princeton.EDU (Eric
Tilenius) writes:
> The bulk of CoCo discussion is NOT about OS-9.

In view of a previous posting from Mr. Tilenius, I just can't resist the
following jab: maybe, but all the *worthwhile* CoCo discussion concerns OS-9.

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

That said, I agree that comp.os.os9 is not the place for all CoCo traffic
(OS-9, as pointed out, runs on a fair number of computers whose owners
probably don't care about CoCo HD interfaces), and that *if* there's to
be a CoCo group, it should be comp.sys.tandy.coco...

...but why bother? I've seen no non-CoCo traffic on comp.sys.m6809 for
quite some time, but that doesn't mean there might not be (you might be
surprised at some of the places 6809s turn up, e.g. the Ensoniq Mirage
and Fairlight CMI), and the presence of CoCo traffic indicates that at
least some CoCo users have figured out what CPU is inside their computer.
Perhaps the list of active newsgroups should give the CoCo as an example
of a 6809-based system?

[The preceding posting has been scrubbed with DISCLAIMO, the new powder
that renders all opinions one's own--now with Lemon-Freshened Borax!]

		James Jones