home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.hardware:13940 comp.sys.mac.misc:13539 comp.sys.mac.programmer:12767 comp.sys.mac.wanted:6836
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac.wanted
- Path: sparky!uunet!camex!sunfs3!kent
- From: kent@sunfs3.Camex.COM (Kent Borg)
- Subject: Re: Mac Magazine Info (Summary)
- Message-ID: <1992Jul21.121650.8778@sunfs3.Camex.COM>
- Organization: Camex Inc., Boston MA
- References: <61714@cup.portal.com> <1992Jul8.215252.26952@utkux1.utk.edu> <61736@cup.portal.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 12:16:50 EDT
- Lines: 22
-
- In article <61736@cup.portal.com> MacUserLabs@cup.portal.com (Stephan - Somogyi) writes:
- >Don't forget that MacWeek is a weekly with substantially shorter lead-times
- >than a monthly; our average lead-time for reviews is 4ish months. Lab report
- >lead-times are 6ish months.
-
- Why?
-
- Is there any God-Ordained reason why the lead-time for a monthly must
- be so much longer? Yes, things can always conspire to be a week old
- in even the most tightly run weekly and things can always conspire to
- be a month old in the most tightly run monthly, and yes articles take
- time to write and magazines take time to print and mail, but the
- better part of a year??? This is the computer industry!
-
- Sure, shortening these times would cost money, but it also would be a
- real service and buy a competitive edge.
-
- --
- Kent Borg kent@camex.com or kentborg@aol.com
- H:(617) 776-6899 W:(617) 426-3577
- As always, things look better when some costs are left out.
- -Economist 3-28-92 p. 94
-