OT Google Groups???

George Macdonald wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new format
and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering private "Google
Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of Usenet... as though, to
the casual observer, there is no distinction between the two? I just found
out last night that I can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google
Groups by clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
.chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't find it.

Have you tried the "other", civilized "GGs" ... :-)

http://groups.google.ca/
http://groups.google.nl
http://groups.google.co.uk/
http://groups.google.it

Without an 'inclusion' of the =entire= Dictionary of Amer Slang ...
I am unabale to offer a fully descriptive comment.
My apologies.
:-)


This seems like a serious violation of the spirit of Usenet to me and while
I do value their search of the Usenet archives, it's looking like a
dangerous threat to the future of Usenet in general - a bloody takeover in
fact. Just wondered what others think of this?... and what alternatives we
have for the archives?

A fair ?.

If IBM can screw up, so can Google Corp.
To 'err' is hu_man.
Mite be a new Marketing "type", with a shiney new MBA ... `eh?
You "thimk" ???

MC&HNY,
Ed

Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new format
and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering private "Google
Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of Usenet... as though, to
the casual observer, there is no distinction between the two? I just found
out last night that I can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google
Groups by clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
..chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't find it.

This seems like a serious violation of the spirit of Usenet to me and while
I do value their search of the Usenet archives, it's looking like a
dangerous threat to the future of Usenet in general - a bloody takeover in
fact. Just wondered what others think of this?... and what alternatives we
have for the archives?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

George Macdonald wrote:
: Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new
: format and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering
: private "Google Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of
: Usenet... as though, to the casual observer, there is no
: distinction between the two? I just found out last night that I
: can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google Groups by
: clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
: .chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
: propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't
: find it.
:
: This seems like a serious violation of the spirit of Usenet to me
: and while I do value their search of the Usenet archives, it's
: looking like a dangerous threat to the future of Usenet in general
: - a bloody takeover in fact. Just wondered what others think of
: this?... and what alternatives we have for the archives?

You are correct in your observation re Google. Also, it appears they have
dropped an enormous amount of their archives and (from what I hear on 'the
grapevine') are only archiving NG's with heavy traffic. I do not
understand their criteria for what is "heavy" or popular, but I hear they
have dropped (or may be dropping) something like 50% of the Usenet
archives. I mean, Jesus H. Christ, what a friggen disaster (IMHO). When
DejaNews sold out to Google a few years back, I just **knew** this was
going to happen. Guess I'm a little surprised it took this long. From my
POV, looks like the suits over at Google had to make room for their crappy
"1 Gig email service", and with a finite amount of storage, something had
to go. Oh the humanity of it all. :-(

J.

George Macdonald wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new format
and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering private "Google
Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of Usenet... as though, to
the casual observer, there is no distinction between the two? I just found
out last night that I can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google
Groups by clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
.chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't find it.


I had no problem navigating to this group from that site.

I started with your URL and clicked the "Browse all of Usenet" link.
On the next page I clicked "next" until I could see "comp.*" on the list.
After selecting that there is another list of groups from which I
selected comp.sys.*, then comp.sys.ibm.*, and so on.


This seems like a serious violation of the spirit of Usenet to me and while
I do value their search of the Usenet archives, it's looking like a
dangerous threat to the future of Usenet in general - a bloody takeover in
fact. Just wondered what others think of this?... and what alternatives we
have for the archives?

Much ado about nothing, as you are about to discover for yourself.
You had a little to much rum in your eggnog which led to a blonde moment.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article ,
George Macdonald wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new format
and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering private "Google
Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of Usenet... as though, to
the casual observer, there is no distinction between the two? I just found
out last night that I can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google
Groups by clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
.chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't find it.

I hadn't been there in a while, as I tend to use Google Groups only to look
up old posts. The new interface is annoying, but the same trick I used
before to avoid having to drill down through multiple pages still works:

1) Go to http://groups.google.com/. Click on "comp" (or whatever part
of the Usenet hierarchy you want).
2) Look at the current URL:
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&q=comp
You can tack on the rest of the newsgroup name on the end:
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups...hardware.chips
3) Click the link that comes up...it goes he
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...hardware.chips

Hmm...looks like you can also change the newsgroup at the end of that last
URL to go straight to that group (it worked for comp.sys.apple2, at least).
That would appear to be a new feature that could be useful.

_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Linux)

iD8DBQFByGMlVgTKos01OwkRArOZAJ94OTIhycF2voiK5f3Gor 390T3f3wCfcteT
3r5In0/anFgJ0QH2zQqN31U=
=huXk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:54:14 GMT, Rob Stow wrote:

George Macdonald wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new format
and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering private "Google
Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of Usenet... as though, to
the casual observer, there is no distinction between the two? I just found
out last night that I can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google
Groups by clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
.chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't find it.


I had no problem navigating to this group from that site.

I started with your URL and clicked the "Browse all of Usenet" link.
On the next page I clicked "next" until I could see "comp.*" on the list.
After selecting that there is another list of groups from which I
selected comp.sys.*, then comp.sys.ibm.*, and so on.

I'm pretty sure the "Browse all of Usenet" was not there yesterday. I sent
them a comment from their contact page yesterday - got a form reply.

This seems like a serious violation of the spirit of Usenet to me and while
I do value their search of the Usenet archives, it's looking like a
dangerous threat to the future of Usenet in general - a bloody takeover in
fact. Just wondered what others think of this?... and what alternatives we
have for the archives?

Much ado about nothing, as you are about to discover for yourself.
You had a little to much rum in your eggnog which led to a blonde moment.

Nope - no booze and I really sense "trooble aht mill"

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:53:41 GMT,
(Scott Alfter) wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article ,
George Macdonald wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new format
and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering private "Google
Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of Usenet... as though, to
the casual observer, there is no distinction between the two? I just found
out last night that I can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google
Groups by clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
.chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't find it.

I hadn't been there in a while, as I tend to use Google Groups only to look
up old posts. The new interface is annoying, but the same trick I used
before to avoid having to drill down through multiple pages still works:

1) Go to http://groups.google.com/. Click on "comp" (or whatever part
of the Usenet hierarchy you want).

Yeah but that's the old interface - the "beta" has a meaning and if you go
to say, Advanced Search and click on Google Groups you get the new beta
interface.

2) Look at the current URL:
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&q=comp
You can tack on the rest of the newsgroup name on the end:

http://groups-beta.google.com/groups...hardware.chips

3) Click the link that comes up...it goes he
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...hardware.chips

Neither of those are the same as navigating through the hierarchy.

I couldn't see the "Browse all of Usenet" at the beta site yesterday - may
be I just missed it but I think it's since been added.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:37:04 -0500, George Macdonald
wrote:


Neither of those are the same as navigating through the hierarchy.

I couldn't see the "Browse all of Usenet" at the beta site yesterday - may
be I just missed it but I think it's since been added.

It was a PITA to navigate though. The old one has the hierachies at
the top but yesterday at beta you have to go through it page by page
by page. Today however, they put back the hierachies at the top with a
drop down menu too pPp

So it might not be as sinister as you think, it does say Beta right?
pPP


--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 06:13:23 GMT,
(The little lost angel) wrote:

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:37:04 -0500, George Macdonald
wrote:


Neither of those are the same as navigating through the hierarchy.

I couldn't see the "Browse all of Usenet" at the beta site yesterday - may
be I just missed it but I think it's since been added.

It was a PITA to navigate though. The old one has the hierachies at
the top but yesterday at beta you have to go through it page by page
by page. Today however, they put back the hierachies at the top with a
drop down menu too pPp

So it might not be as sinister as you think, it does say Beta right?
pPP

So they're stretching the elastic?? We'd better keep an eye on this;-)

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

I've noticed that the new beta Google Groups actually posts messages to
the Usenet within minutes rather than the previous default of 3 hours
or more.

Yousuf Khan