C
Clayton
Guest
Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are both
very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
T
Tony Sperling
Guest
Re: XP x64 & Vista 64 Groups
I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit NG
was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
sense are dealt with here.
Fair enough?
Tony. . .
"Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are both
> very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
>
>
I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit NG
was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
sense are dealt with here.
Fair enough?
Tony. . .
"Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are both
> very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
>
>
C
Carlos
Guest
Re: XP x64 & Vista 64 Groups
Tony:
Also the small quantity of daily posts (around 10) would not justify
splitting the brains of this distinguished 64-bit enabled international
community into two newsgroups.
Carlos
"Tony Sperling" wrote:
> I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
> it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit NG
> was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
> slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
> sense are dealt with here.
>
> Fair enough?
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>
> "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> > Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are both
> > very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
> >
> >
>
>
>
Tony:
Also the small quantity of daily posts (around 10) would not justify
splitting the brains of this distinguished 64-bit enabled international
community into two newsgroups.
Carlos
"Tony Sperling" wrote:
> I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
> it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit NG
> was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
> slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
> sense are dealt with here.
>
> Fair enough?
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>
> "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> > Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are both
> > very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
> >
> >
>
>
>
J
John Barnes
Guest
Re: XP x64 & Vista 64 Groups
Ouch :!>(( There are, however a number of Vista64 posts on the various
Vista groups Maybe 3 Vista.general groups 86 64 Trolls(by far the largest)
"Carlos" <Carlos@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9AE56FBB-78F2-40B4-AF81-A88DB6A8E2FC@microsoft.com...
> Tony:
> Also the small quantity of daily posts (around 10) would not justify
> splitting the brains of this distinguished 64-bit enabled international
> community into two newsgroups.
>
> Carlos
>
> "Tony Sperling" wrote:
>
>> I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
>> it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit
>> NG
>> was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
>> slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
>> sense are dealt with here.
>>
>> Fair enough?
>>
>>
>> Tony. . .
>>
>>
>> "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
>> news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> > Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are
>> > both
>> > very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
Ouch :!>(( There are, however a number of Vista64 posts on the various
Vista groups Maybe 3 Vista.general groups 86 64 Trolls(by far the largest)
"Carlos" <Carlos@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9AE56FBB-78F2-40B4-AF81-A88DB6A8E2FC@microsoft.com...
> Tony:
> Also the small quantity of daily posts (around 10) would not justify
> splitting the brains of this distinguished 64-bit enabled international
> community into two newsgroups.
>
> Carlos
>
> "Tony Sperling" wrote:
>
>> I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
>> it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit
>> NG
>> was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
>> slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
>> sense are dealt with here.
>>
>> Fair enough?
>>
>>
>> Tony. . .
>>
>>
>> "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
>> news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> > Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are
>> > both
>> > very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
T
Tony Sperling
Guest
Re: XP x64 & Vista 64 Groups
That is true - quantity has fallen significantly over the last year. In
Pre-Vista days, though, this was a rather busy group, I think.
Tony. . .
"Carlos" <Carlos@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9AE56FBB-78F2-40B4-AF81-A88DB6A8E2FC@microsoft.com...
> Tony:
> Also the small quantity of daily posts (around 10) would not justify
> splitting the brains of this distinguished 64-bit enabled international
> community into two newsgroups.
>
> Carlos
>
> "Tony Sperling" wrote:
>
> > I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
> > it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit
NG
> > was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
> > slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
> > sense are dealt with here.
> >
> > Fair enough?
> >
> >
> > Tony. . .
> >
> >
> > "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
> > news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> > > Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are
both
> > > very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
That is true - quantity has fallen significantly over the last year. In
Pre-Vista days, though, this was a rather busy group, I think.
Tony. . .
"Carlos" <Carlos@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9AE56FBB-78F2-40B4-AF81-A88DB6A8E2FC@microsoft.com...
> Tony:
> Also the small quantity of daily posts (around 10) would not justify
> splitting the brains of this distinguished 64-bit enabled international
> community into two newsgroups.
>
> Carlos
>
> "Tony Sperling" wrote:
>
> > I don't think there's a real answer to this - each versions is served by
> > it's own NG and when XP x64 was in the works they realized a pure 64bit
NG
> > was called for. There is a Vista NG, they seem to take care of the usual
> > slandering and mud throwing, but real-life 64bit issues in the broadest
> > sense are dealt with here.
> >
> > Fair enough?
> >
> >
> > Tony. . .
> >
> >
> > "Clayton" <claytonbNOSPAM@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
> > news:%23xPTokZAIHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> > > Why don't we have separate groups for XP x64 and Vista 64? they are
both
> > > very different hence XP and Vista 32 both have their own groups
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >