Maybe that's the case. But I like the simplicity and elegance of ng.
Far easier to follow and to search in the groups.google archive.
Also the fact that it is slightly offbeat in the public conscience.
I.e. news reporters always refer to it as "chat-rooms" or "forums",
perhaps to keep the secret of usenet to themselves.
We're all supposed to be 'blogging' nowadays. Blogs are annoying to use
because you have to troll through so much content to find things of
interest. At least with newsgroups and forums it's fairly trivial to skip
over things that are not interesting and go straight for the 'meaty' bits.
Probably part of it, but the forums need to be good quality without the
overbearing 'steering' of content for a certain purpose like what happens
with the forums at a certain saabnet website. At least here in this free and
open newsgroup all discussion is welcomed no matter if someone else happens
to agree or disagree with a point of view. That's the true value of
newsgroups, and it's what forum sites should do to but unfortunately at
least one has commercial interests as a higher priority than allow free,
open access and discussions.
Craig's Saab C900 Page at | Craig's Classic Saab Workshop - Sydney .au
http://lios.apana.org.au/~c900 | http://www.classicsaab.net and other URL's
But they are not being introduced to real Saabs, only to the ghost of
the "brand". Long time GM customers are used to a diet of multi hued
shit and would only expect more of the same, so they will
inadvertently aid and abet the loss of Saab DNA.
Says who? What makes a real Saab a real Saab? Why is a current Saab a
lesser Saab than a 1980 Saab?
Drive any modern <insert brand> and it's very different from something in
the 1970s. Modern stuff with a Saab badge is a modern interpretation of
what you may consider to be a proper Saab.
People still want the MG ZR, ZS, ZT derived from the Rover 25, 45, 75. More
so the ZR. It isn't a unique product, merely something that is perceived as
being "British" and "sporty."
Just like Saab. It's perceived as being "Swedish" and "comfortable."
Correct. Regardless of taste, people still want it.
Somebody at the office chopped in their Audi S3 for a ZR 2.0 diesel. "Oh I
bought the S3 back in May but it's been too expensive to run, my ZR is as
quick* but British** and cheaper to run."
**hacking up and coughing fit.
The MG Z cars was a bold move. It worked for a while, but time went on
and there were no replacements on the horizon, while their competitors had
undergone several transformations. That was in particular a problem for
ZR and ZS. The cars looked more and more like Halfords tarted up bangers.
Sorry, but that's just Tommy Rot. It's not an interpretation, it's a
Vauxhall with a blue badge. (I like Vauxhalls BTW!)
Real Saabs died with the 9000, the last Saab with any true Saab bloodline.
That said, the 9-3 is an excellent motorcar, and the most reliable car (of
any brand) we've ever owned was a NG 900s.
This newsgroup died when the likes of Saab Druids such as Grunf disappeared,
and Dave Hinz isn't here anymore to point and laugh at when he gets all
uptight about top posting and netiquette...
(awaiting the flame fest!)
It didn't look like any of those did it ? Nor did it share engines or running
gear or interiors. It was after all only a shared bodyshell and the later CS
model radically changed that (for the better) anyway.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.