With the checkin of #10362, the code to render to a stream now looks like:

```
import { renderToStream } from 'react-dom/server'

renderToStream(<div>some text</div>).pipe(response);
```

This is great! I am, however, a little concerned about taking the word "node" out of the mix, because I'm thinking that we may eventually want to render to [**browser** streams](https://www.w3.org/TR/streams-api/), which are a really neat feature that can be used in concert with "service-worker-side rendering". I would propose renaming `renderToStream` to `renderToNodeStream` and `renderToStaticStream` to `renderToStaticNodeStream`.  This would give room for `renderToBrowserStream` in the future.

If I make a PR on this, would it have a chance of being accepted? 

cc @gaearon & @sebmarkbage 
return (
        <div>
          <h1>How are you?</h1>
          <Nice />
        </div>
      );
    }
    expect(ReactDOMServerBrowser.renderToString(<Greeting />)).toEqual(
      ReactDOMServer.renderToString(<Greeting />),
    );
    expect(ReactDOMServerBrowser.renderToStaticMarkup(<Greeting />)).toEqual(
      ReactDOMServer.renderToStaticMarkup(<Greeting />),
    );
  });
  if (ReactDOMFeatureFlags.useFiber) {
    it('throws meaningfully for server-only APIs', () => {
      expect(() => ReactDOMServerBrowser.renderToStream(<div />)).toThrow(
        'ReactDOMServer.renderToStream(): The streaming API is not available ' +
          'in the browser. Use ReactDOMServer.renderToString() instead.',
      );
      expect(() => ReactDOMServerBrowser.renderToStaticStream(<div />)).toThrow(
        'ReactDOMServer.renderToStaticStream(): The streaming API is not available ' +
          'in the browser. Use ReactDOMServer.renderToStaticMarkup() instead.',
      );
    });
  }
});