Paul,
I agree with you, having been in the industry for 20 years. However,
because some systems can be installed without reading the full manual, users
are trained that they don't need to read the manual. So when they encounter
a system that requires full reading, they wouldn't be able to tell. Because
all the manuals say they must read before installing, they assume that all
of them are lying.
Bruce Dayton
Sacramento, CA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Provencher, Paul M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: Re: Kodak Packaging
> I had a complete computer system roll-out fail because the customer didn't
> read the directions. We provided a FULLY ILLUSTRATED, color,
step-by-step,
> online and printed guide. It was a long and detailed, but not a
complicated
> procedure.
>
> Long nasty story made short, I get a phone call to report that something
is
> wrong, it doesn't work, etc., etc.
>
> I go out and ask if they are following the install manual. They told me
> there were.
>
> I said what step was causing problems (page number, step number please)
>
> They say, "Well the manual is only one page and it's step number 8-of-10."
>
> What? The manual is 65 pages long and there are over 400 steps. What
> manual are you using?
>
> "Well, we condensed it down to one page because it was taking too long and
> we didn't want to read the steps for every install"
>
> OK, anyone who develops software knows that the install was too long and
> complicated. Unfortunately, it was a system that used off-the-shelf
> software (a suite of five separate products) and integrations to four of
> those products. As such, the install could not be simplified any more
than
> it already was (we wrote several install programs to reduce the 2000 steps
> to the 400. It still required human involvement. Not a rocket scientist,
> just someone who could read and check off steps as they went. If there
was
> to be a "next time", we'd require that the roll-out be handled by us and
> bill accordingly (We suggested this but the customer wanted to save
money).
> Unfortunately there will not be a next time...
>
> So anyone who thinks I am split on this issue, I guess I just see two
> different issues. One is the companies who foster this kind of ignorance
> with their packaging/presentation/marketing philosophy and the idiot
> consumers who are too lazy/ignorant/stupid/busy to care. That is a whole
> different thing from situations where it is not necessary to read, pay
> attention, and take personal responsibility (e.g. I think it's OK for
people
> to use P&S cameras)...
>
> Paul M. Provencher
> (ppro)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 11:42 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: OT: Re: Kodak Packaging
>
>
> On Mon, 14 May 2001 22:25:08 -0400, Douglas E Harmon wrote:
>
> > I get countless questions from people who
> > REFUSE to RTFM. I sometimes repeat the same answer to the same person
> > multiple times. Sigh.....
>
> I don't. I tell them it's in the manual and go back to my real job. I'm
> not paid to train them to read.
>
> TTYL, DougF
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
