[comp.sys.mac.announce] other Apple press releases have been posted to comp.sys.mac.misc

werner@rascal.ics.utexas.edu (Werner Uhrig) (10/16/90)

	I've posted the following additional Apple Press Releases to
	comp.sys.mac.misc  (thanks to Steve Lemke <lemke@radius.com>
	for submitting them)

                ---------------

   1) 16-Oct radius!lemke Mac Classic Press Release (5881 chars)
   2) 16-Oct radius!lemke Two New Apple Displays Press Rel (5814 chars)
   3) 16-Oct radius!lemke Mac LC Press Release (8160 chars)
   4) 16-Oct radius!lemke Mac IIsi Press Release (8883 chars)
   5) 16-Oct radius!lemke Low Cost Mac -- General Press Re (10410 chars)

                ---------------

	why some in CSMA and some in CSMM, you ask?  well, I thought the
	"spec sheets" of more geenral interest and of a better data/noise
	ratio than the others ...  it was a tough call!  :-)

				Cheers,		---Werner

ps: in general, new product announcements or press releases should be posted
	to comp.newprod;  however, the moderator of that group has in the
	past been known to accept press releases ONLY when coming from "the
	horses mouth" (i.e. from the originator).

	If you want to announce a Macintosh-product, that's the place to
	post (cross-post to the appropriate unmoderated comp.sys.mac.*
	group if you must;  though I am not sure if/that the moderator of
	comp.newprod honors the cross-posting request.  do NOT post an
	identical copy of the article to an unmoderated group - that would
	duplicate the net-load and might get the comp.newprod moderator
	mad.  Posting a brief article containing a pointer to the larger
	article in comp.newprod is a good idea, however - but wait until
	you actually have seen the article distributed on comp.newprod)

	If you would like to submit a new product announcement
	to comp.sys.mac.announce (or an announcement of a SIGNIFICANT
	update) my policy shall be to accept only articles which

		(a) are of interest to a LARGE (my call) portion of all
			Macintosh users

		(b) contain little or no "fluff" (my call; I either return
			non-qualifying articles, forward them to another
			newsgroup, or edit a summarized/condensed version)

		(c) are "real" products (i.e. the less confidence that I
			have that the product is of mature release quality
			the less likely it will be that I accept the article
			for CBMA-distribution)

	that's my informal guideline;  I apologize in advance if you
	should find fault with any of my decisions.  But I'll do the
	best that I can (no more and no less ...:-)

				Cheers,		---Werner