@tohecz I would love to remove Macs from various places in engineering community too. But I can't say that. That's what I mean. Buying a Mac with that cost is engineering wise a mistake. Does anyone care? Nope. That's what I meant.
@percusse in what sense? I put the article on arXiv the day I send it for submission, but I don't tell the journal that it's on arXiv. Still, this information is on my webpage as well as in arXiv listings
I've actually seen Kannappan Sampath's article on arXiv thanks to the daily e-mail feeds
@percusse I don't think we know "proof is a little too long for the article". Articles of 40 pages are not so incommon in my field, so if you have a long proof, you simply submit the whole thing.
@percusse complains about what? no, I haven't seen that. Surely the mainstream journals don't have any such limitation, and these include RAIRO-ITA (Cambridge U.P.), Integers (independent online-only open-access journal), TCS (Springer), ...
There's a limit on conference papers, and the full proofs are not required there
@tohecz If you submit to IEEE you have a strict page limit, 17 pages double column for review and 12 pages two column for the camera-ready version. Otherwise you pay $175 for each.
@tohecz Legally it should be 2-3 months but easily extends to 6 months if you don't ask to the editor. Then you have a super strict one month to react and then again an uncertain time... It's just stupid.
@percusse sorry, I meant the review as the text of the review ;) but I agree, this is stupid
btw, waiting half a year for a review is quite a standard here. It actually increases the popularity of conferences with quality-published proceedgings, because there you know that in 5 months after submission, the thing is published