On Apr 12, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Norman Palardy wrote: > REAL should provide this as part of the product but documentation > updates are quite a way behind product updates. > They seem to not be considered as important as updating the product. > I personally don't view it that way and hope they will deal with this > shortcoming at some point.
This is a very important matter, IMHO, as it leads to such comments as "Amateur", "Not ready for 'Prime Time'", etc. when it comes to the perception of REALbasic *not* being a serious product. "We" know that is not true but "we" are also much more informed than the new user is. When one spends serious money for a product, one expects its documentation to be up to date. RS is also not alone in this matter but it always could be better. Think "Avis" and their slogan "We Try Harder". When one knows most of the various ways to get the full story, it is fine. When one doesn't, however, they often are forced to rely on the "Official" documentation that comes with a program. When that is inaccurate or not 'up-to-date' then it really doesn't do the job that it is intended to do. In my opinion, one should not 'have' to join a mailing list or forum simply to discover missing items in the documentation. These should be for explaining what is already available to the user should they not understand it. Terry _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
