Xref: utzoo news.groups:5361 comp.windows.misc:678 comp.sys.ibm.pc:19080 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!cca!mirror!mguyott From: mguyott@mirror.TMC.COM (Marc Guyott) Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.windows.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Call for discussion: comp.windows.ms Keywords: windows MS Windows Presentation Manager Message-ID: <17982@mirror.TMC.COM> Date: 13 Sep 88 17:47:24 GMT References: <17956@mirror.TMC.COM> <4059@umd5.umd.edu> Reply-To: mguyott@prism.TMC.COM (Marc Guyott) Organization: Mirror Systems, Cambridge Mass. Lines: 35 In article <4059@umd5.umd.edu> you write: >In article <17956@mirror.TMC.COM> mguyott@prism.TMC.COM (Marc Guyott) writes: >>more sense to create a news group called comp.windows.ibm.pc and include > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>MS Windows, the OS/2 Presentation Manager, GEM, etc? > > This makes more sense, to me at least. OS/2PM is supposedly >(but don't hold your breath) going to be 80% compatible with >MS-W, so discussions on both should be held in the same place. >The combination of the 3 should be more than enough to warrant >a new newsgroup. > >Hollis Ross > I still like the idea of creating comp.windows.ms for MS Windows and when the traffic picks up for OS/2 PM creating comp.windows.pm or comp.windows.os2 for presenation manager discussions. I believe that the differences between the two (such as routine names, parameters passed, functionality available, issues dealing with memory (expanded, extended, etc), accessing interrupts, accessing hardware, etc.) will be significant enough that the majority of the postings will be of interest to only one group or the other. The few items that may be of interest to both groups could be cross posted. Is there anyone else that feels this way? Marc ---- ... I never saw the morning until I stayed up all night ... Claudia Schmidt Marc Guyott mguyott@mirror.TMC.COM {mit-eddie, pyramid, harvard!wjh12, cca, datacube}!mirror!mguyott Mirror Systems Cambridge, MA 02140 617/661-0777