Proposal for an iPad newsgroup
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: Adam H. Kerman on 10 Mar 2010 13:51 Dave Sill <dave(a)sill.org> wrote: >You're doing great, Michelle. Ignore Kerman. If you don't wish to fail, please pay attention.
From: JF Mezei on 10 Mar 2010 14:54 (the reply I made went to news.groups only, this is a copy to comp.sys.mac.system). Michelle Steiner wrote: > I tentatively suggest misc.phone.mobile.ipad, how about comp.sys.mac.handheld which would cater to ipoddtouch, iphone, ipad and whatever else Apple may think of in that product space ? In other words, sometghing which encompasses all product with that version/build of OS-X with the touchscreen user interface etc etc.
From: David Bostwick on 10 Mar 2010 16:07 In article <michelle-D95C02.12510210032010(a)nothing.attdns.com>, Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote: >In article <7vq7jkFqavU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Dave Sill <dave(a)sill.org> >wrote: > >> > I followed Kathy's advice, and read >> > <http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=policies:creation> >> >> You're doing great, Michelle. Ignore Kerman. > >Thanks. He's one of those people who act obnoxious and confrontational >under the guise of appearing to be trying to be helpful, right? > No, it's not an act. It's just Adam.
From: JF Mezei on 10 Mar 2010 16:10 Michelle Steiner wrote: > Right; that's where the discussion should be, in accordance with the "big > 8" guidance on discussing the formation of new newsgroups. Having followups to the relevant newsgroups for the initial trial ballons/discussions would be convenient for us. I don't follow that other newsgroup and won't until there is some call for a vote. In fact, you should have had the initial trail ballon only in the mac newsgroups and once you have a better idea of what to do (based on initial feedback), you could have gone to the news.group with more formal process. Don't see this as a criticism like some others have. This is more of a selfish thought to make it easier for me to follow the discussion. But making it easy for people to provide initial feedback should be your goal. It seems to me that Apple has 3 main product lines: the "device" ipods (no visible OS), the handheld OS devices, and the desktop/server computers with the OS-X we know about. As the handhelds seem to share an OS/features and UI, it would seem logical to group them for the long term. Or perhaps each group will generate sufficient traffic to warrant one newsgroup per device. I don't know. But this is what trial ballons to get feedback from community is for.
From: BreadWithSpam on 10 Mar 2010 16:32
Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> writes: > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot(a)vaxination.ca> wrote: > > Michelle Steiner wrote: > > > > > I tentatively suggest misc.phone.mobile.ipad, > > > > how about comp.sys.mac.handheld > > which would cater to ipoddtouch, iphone, ipad and whatever else > Would it be a good idea to conflate all those products into a single > newsgroup, especially when there's an extant newsgroup for one of those > products already? It seems pretty reasonable, actually. For all the bluster of some of the discussion here (is not, is too, etc. re: "same" OS as iPhones, etc), the fact is that those devices all have an awful lot of overlap. As for another group did you mean comp.sys.mac.portables? That's all I saw, at least in the comp.sys.mac.* hierarchy which seemed relevant. Part of the problem is that with some of these devices, traditional categories are getting blurred and it seems that we just have to accept that highly specific newsgroup hierarchies or group names aren't going to be perfect. I could also see, perhaps, comp.sys.mac.touch, not in an "ipod touch" specific sense, but more "all the touch devices from Apple". I see no reason why, if the iPad really takes off, that it wouldn't possibly spawn other, perhaps larger and not even handheld devices based on it. -- Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed. Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow? http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting |