If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7?
-- |\ /| | \/ |@rk \../ \/os |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
In "Linea Recta"
wrote: How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? The closest you'll come is "alt.windows7.general" which your news provider may, or may not, carry. -- St. Paul, MN |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
"Linea Recta" wrote in message
... How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? alt.windows7.general Ertrnal-September has it. -- ~Bruce |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 13:45:38 -0800, "Bruce Hagen"
wrote: "Linea Recta" wrote in message ... How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? alt.windows7.general Ertrnal-September has it. Not to complain to you, g but perhaps to help Linea Recta, that's a giant typo, almost as giant as some of mine. That should be Eternal-September. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote in message
... On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 13:45:38 -0800, "Bruce Hagen" wrote: "Linea Recta" wrote in message ... How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? alt.windows7.general Ertrnal-September has it. Not to complain to you, g but perhaps to help Linea Recta, that's a giant typo, almost as giant as some of mine. That should be Eternal-September. Google corrects my spelling. eg Showing results for Eternal-September Search instead for Ertrnal-September -- ~Bruce |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
Linea Recta wrote:
How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? news:alt.windows7.general |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
Linea Recta wrote:
How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? You're not a Google Groups person, so you're in luck. The alt.windows7.general group exists, but not on all servers. That's because newgroup in alt.* is handled manually by administrators, due to abuse. My two servers, Eternal September and AIOE, happen to have it. Doing a "refresh" of the groups list, may cause it to be added to your news client. The reason I mention Google Groups, is Google Groups does not tend to honor new_group commands either. And is not currently archiving alt.windows7.general . That means we can't search the group, by visiting Google. I expect it's still stored on a hard drive at Google somewhere, but they simply don't pay attention to their configuration at all. Nobody really cares about it. So it can be found on third-party servers. And if you haven't refreshed your groups list lately, that's why it didn't show up. There is also a group for Windows 8 (alt.comp.os.windows-8). Paul |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
"Linea Recta" wrote in message
... How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? Because MS no longer monitors or supports newsgroups. Long before it marketed Win7 MS announced it had switched support to blog and similar web sites. -- Don Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
"Paul" schreef in bericht
... Linea Recta wrote: How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? You're not a Google Groups person, so you're in luck. The alt.windows7.general group exists, but not on all servers. That's because newgroup in alt.* is handled manually by administrators, due to abuse. My two servers, Eternal September and AIOE, happen to have it. Doing a "refresh" of the groups list, may cause it to be added to your news client. The reason I mention Google Groups, is Google Groups does not tend to honor new_group commands either. And is not currently archiving alt.windows7.general . That means we can't search the group, by visiting Google. I expect it's still stored on a hard drive at Google somewhere, but they simply don't pay attention to their configuration at all. Nobody really cares about it. So it can be found on third-party servers. And if you haven't refreshed your groups list lately, that's why it didn't show up. There is also a group for Windows 8 (alt.comp.os.windows-8). And why has this to be so mysterious? And why the fancy name "Eternal September"? (At first I thought this was some sort of sign of...) Why is subject "Windows 7" treated different than other news subjects? Why are things made intentionally complicated? thanks, -- |\ /| | \/ |@rk \../ \/os |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
Linea Recta wrote:
"Paul" schreef in bericht ... Linea Recta wrote: How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? You're not a Google Groups person, so you're in luck. The alt.windows7.general group exists, but not on all servers. That's because newgroup in alt.* is handled manually by administrators, due to abuse. My two servers, Eternal September and AIOE, happen to have it. Doing a "refresh" of the groups list, may cause it to be added to your news client. The reason I mention Google Groups, is Google Groups does not tend to honor new_group commands either. And is not currently archiving alt.windows7.general . That means we can't search the group, by visiting Google. I expect it's still stored on a hard drive at Google somewhere, but they simply don't pay attention to their configuration at all. Nobody really cares about it. So it can be found on third-party servers. And if you haven't refreshed your groups list lately, that's why it didn't show up. There is also a group for Windows 8 (alt.comp.os.windows-8). And why has this to be so mysterious? And why the fancy name "Eternal September"? (At first I thought this was some sort of sign of...) Why is subject "Windows 7" treated different than other news subjects? Why are things made intentionally complicated? thanks, The administrator of the server, has a sense of humor. You can see the origins of the name, here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_september ******* The ad-hoc nature of USENET, is half the fun. There's the official part, with charters, RFDs, and votes... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_8_(Usenet) And there is alt. When users feel there should be an alt group, at one time you could newgroup one yourself. That's where alt.swedish.shef.bork.bork.bork came from. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!fo...bork.bork.bork http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Chef That led to run-away behavior, and eventually administrators disabled the controls on alt.*, so that the administrators did things manually. People were creating vanity groups, like you could make alt.joe.blow.is.an.idiot if you wanted. Things can be added to alt, with less effort than for the Big-8. If a third-party hierarchy such as microsoft.* no longer was in operation, or accepting new entries, someone wanting to discuss "OSes" would need some other place for them. They could have been put in comp.* in the Big-8, but that would have required work on selecting a naming convention, which does make the naming more systematic. But it's still a pain-in-the-rear to get your discussion group. So someone asked for a non-systematically named alt.windows7.general, with no prospects of adding additional hierarchy to it. Because the participation rate just wouldn't be there to expand it. The same thing happened with Windows 8, and you can tell the person who asked for Windows 8, either didn't see the Windows 7 one, or decided "their idea was better". Groups like that exist for other languages, but I haven't gone looking for them. Depending on how poorly named a group is, it can be difficult to find with the "search" feature in most news clients. You virtually have to hear about it "word of mouth", while in a group like the WinXP one. In some cases, it would be *you* sending an email to your server administrator, asking that the group in question be added. Someone has to do it. Strictly speaking, there should not be a microsoft.* group. The group we're currently using, doesn't belong here any more. Groups which originate on third-party ("company") servers, like adobe.*, microsoft.*, mozilla.*, they fill a need. But if the administrators on microsoft.* issues a signed rmgroup command, the other servers are supposed to follow suit and remove it. The companies would normally do this, for spam control. Say you're adobe and offering a forum for product discussion. Initially, everything is cool. Other server admins, ask to connect it up on their server (as USENET is just a jumble of servers with a crude protocol for syncing posts on the servers). Eventually, there's too much spam, or not enough control. The originator of these third-party servers, has the option of taking them private again, giving them the ability to remove them entirely if they want. Microsoft could have done that with microsoft.*, but it would seem microsoft really never cared what happened outside the confines of its own building. And the group we're communicating in today, is an orphan. Administrators will maintain its existence, as long as there is traffic in it. (The last reduction in the size of microsoft.*, to perhaps 1600 groups, was done based on a lack of traffic in the other 1400 or so groups. Just rough numbers, I don't keep a record or anything.) alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork doesn't exist on my server any more. It would have been removed for traffic reasons, as it was serving no purpose, and would only have been popular while there was a Muppets show. When a commercial server announces "we have 200,000 groups", it would be because the administrator didn't trim down the groups, the way some of the smaller servers have. Maintaining just the traffic bearing groups, means less work monitoring for spam, less time spent backing up the server occasionally and so on. Groups like alt.flame exist, as a place to send people with bad attitudes. There are a few other groups that exist to fulfill that role. And quite a few individuals who belong there, and not in a regular news group (with a topic). That's a rough picture of what you're using. It all has a colorful history. Paul |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
"Paul" schreef in bericht
... Linea Recta wrote: "Paul" schreef in bericht ... Linea Recta wrote: How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? You're not a Google Groups person, so you're in luck. The alt.windows7.general group exists, but not on all servers. That's because newgroup in alt.* is handled manually by administrators, due to abuse. My two servers, Eternal September and AIOE, happen to have it. Doing a "refresh" of the groups list, may cause it to be added to your news client. The reason I mention Google Groups, is Google Groups does not tend to honor new_group commands either. And is not currently archiving alt.windows7.general . That means we can't search the group, by visiting Google. I expect it's still stored on a hard drive at Google somewhere, but they simply don't pay attention to their configuration at all. Nobody really cares about it. So it can be found on third-party servers. And if you haven't refreshed your groups list lately, that's why it didn't show up. There is also a group for Windows 8 (alt.comp.os.windows-8). And why has this to be so mysterious? And why the fancy name "Eternal September"? (At first I thought this was some sort of sign of...) Why is subject "Windows 7" treated different than other news subjects? Why are things made intentionally complicated? thanks, The administrator of the server, has a sense of humor. You can see the origins of the name, here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_september ******* The ad-hoc nature of USENET, is half the fun. There's the official part, with charters, RFDs, and votes... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_8_(Usenet) And there is alt. When users feel there should be an alt group, at one time you could newgroup one yourself. That's where alt.swedish.shef.bork.bork.bork came from. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!fo...bork.bork.bork http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Chef That led to run-away behavior, and eventually administrators disabled the controls on alt.*, so that the administrators did things manually. People were creating vanity groups, like you could make alt.joe.blow.is.an.idiot if you wanted. Things can be added to alt, with less effort than for the Big-8. If a third-party hierarchy such as microsoft.* no longer was in operation, or accepting new entries, someone wanting to discuss "OSes" would need some other place for them. They could have been put in comp.* in the Big-8, but that would have required work on selecting a naming convention, which does make the naming more systematic. But it's still a pain-in-the-rear to get your discussion group. So someone asked for a non-systematically named alt.windows7.general, with no prospects of adding additional hierarchy to it. Because the participation rate just wouldn't be there to expand it. The same thing happened with Windows 8, and you can tell the person who asked for Windows 8, either didn't see the Windows 7 one, or decided "their idea was better". Groups like that exist for other languages, but I haven't gone looking for them. Depending on how poorly named a group is, it can be difficult to find with the "search" feature in most news clients. You virtually have to hear about it "word of mouth", while in a group like the WinXP one. In some cases, it would be *you* sending an email to your server administrator, asking that the group in question be added. Someone has to do it. Strictly speaking, there should not be a microsoft.* group. The group we're currently using, doesn't belong here any more. Groups which originate on third-party ("company") servers, like adobe.*, microsoft.*, mozilla.*, they fill a need. But if the administrators on microsoft.* issues a signed rmgroup command, the other servers are supposed to follow suit and remove it. The companies would normally do this, for spam control. Say you're adobe and offering a forum for product discussion. Initially, everything is cool. Other server admins, ask to connect it up on their server (as USENET is just a jumble of servers with a crude protocol for syncing posts on the servers). Eventually, there's too much spam, or not enough control. The originator of these third-party servers, has the option of taking them private again, giving them the ability to remove them entirely if they want. Microsoft could have done that with microsoft.*, but it would seem microsoft really never cared what happened outside the confines of its own building. And the group we're communicating in today, is an orphan. Administrators will maintain its existence, as long as there is traffic in it. (The last reduction in the size of microsoft.*, to perhaps 1600 groups, was done based on a lack of traffic in the other 1400 or so groups. Just rough numbers, I don't keep a record or anything.) alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork doesn't exist on my server any more. It would have been removed for traffic reasons, as it was serving no purpose, and would only have been popular while there was a Muppets show. When a commercial server announces "we have 200,000 groups", it would be because the administrator didn't trim down the groups, the way some of the smaller servers have. Maintaining just the traffic bearing groups, means less work monitoring for spam, less time spent backing up the server occasionally and so on. Groups like alt.flame exist, as a place to send people with bad attitudes. There are a few other groups that exist to fulfill that role. And quite a few individuals who belong there, and not in a regular news group (with a topic). That's a rough picture of what you're using. It all has a colorful history. Thanks very much for your overview. I suppose separating sense from nonsense will become an ever growing problem on the internet. Making things harder to find efficiently of course... -- |\ /| | \/ |@rk \../ \/os |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 12:31:35 +0100, "Linea Recta"
wrote: And why has this to be so mysterious? And why the fancy name "Eternal September"? See http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/eternal-september |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
no windows 7
In message , Don Phillipson
writes: "Linea Recta" wrote in message ... How come I can't find any news group about Windows 7? Because MS no longer monitors or supports newsgroups. Long before it marketed Win7 MS announced it had switched support to blog and similar web sites. You can't find it in the microsoft.* hierarchy, for that reason. You'll find it under alt.*, as others have explained. You may have to add a new newsserver if the one you use doesn't carry it (and you can't persuade those who run it to do so; apparently it's often just a matter of asking them). It's apparently carried by AIOE, and certainly by eternal-september, teranews, and plus.net (which is really highwinds). As for it being more difficult - that's the alt.* hierarchy, not specifically Windows 7. (And it's not really that difficult to add a new newsserver in _most_ news clients.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'evidence'. Professor Edzart Ernst, prudential magazine, AUTUMN 2006, p. 13. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|