Re: NEWS: KROGER STORES CHOOSES INFORMIX PARALLEL PROCESSING DATABASE TECHNOLOGY FOR CLIENT/SERVER IMPLEMENTATION

In <2q8hv8$2f8@delphinium.cig.mot.com> tomlnsn@rtsg.mot.com (Dave Tomlinson) writes: >In article <1994May3.014640.16666@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, aburt@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (Andrew Burt) writes: >|> In <2q3ibq$p23@infmx.informix.com> billd@informix.com (William Daul) writes: >|> >|> >NOTE: Is this information appropriate for comp.databases.informix? >|> > --Bill >|> >|> >KROGER STORES CHOOSES INFORMIX PARALLEL PROCESSING DATABASE TECHNOLOGY >|> >FOR CLIENT/SERVER IMPLEMENTATION >|> ><clip> >|> Weeeeeeell, to my mind, this would be infinitely better if it were in something >|> like biz.informix, and leave comp.* to technical material. >|> >|> As much as commercialization is inevitable, I would at least like to set >|> a precedent on how it will take place. If we set the precedent, or, rather, >|> stick to it, that biz.* is "sell sell sell" and comp.* is "tech tech tech", >|> I think the net as a whole will be much better off. I.e., if we let the >|> cat out of the bag, then Microsoft and all the other PC vendors will >|> (eventually) start filling comp.sys.ibm.pc.* with their press releases, and so >|> on. >|> >|> I'm *not* against using the net for commercial purposes, but I think we have >|> to ensure it doesn't kill off the unique place it's grown into. >|> >|> So, I encourage a biz.informix group, and suggest posting -all- your >|> press releases there, etc. >I don't exactly agree with either poster. I *want* a place where I can get all >of the Informix information in which *I* am interested. There are already some >hierarchies where I have to read through several groups to get what I want. In >another newsgroup, a poster referred to the "balkanization" of that particular >hierarchy where it had been broken down into many subcategorizations. I don't >think *that* is desirable. >Whereas I don't think that customer related press releases are warranted in this >newsgroup, since they are purely marketing oriented, I don't want only technical >information here, either. I am interested in some of the business related >information about Informix. Release announcements, perhaps training schedules (I >peeked ahead, Bill) and other information that is not purely marketing oriented >should be included/allowed. >This is only my opinion, >David Tomlinson >"President - Great Lakes Informix User's Group" but I also work for a living :-) You can't have it both ways... What you, personally, want, is no doubt not the exact same set of postings as others want. Balkanization is inevitable, with growth, and sometimes desirable. It's not feasible to wade through a group with thousands of postings a day, etc. And there are those on the net who don't want to pay for commercial type postings. That's why I suggested "just one more" group, biz.informix, for the marketing type stuff. My main concern is not with informix material, per se, the but stand we take. That affects the entire net. If you don't want to see press releases all over the place, now is the time to say "here's a way to handle that". biz.XXX can complement comp.XXX. It's easier to read two groups than to cut a messy group in half with a newsreader. (Use nn, for example, and just treat the two informix groups as one. But try to get nn to decide what's a press release and what's not...) Think five years down the road, where do you want to see Usenet? -- Andrew Burt aburt@du.edu "But if he was dying he wouldn't bother to carve "Aaaaargh", he'd just say it."