RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Many in IT would share your interpretation, and in fact consider themselves contractors. It is a rather loose use of the term; in most fields, working for a temp agency on a hourly basis, under someone else's direction, would be considered temp work, not contracting. "Temp work" is not necessarily bad--there is often a trade-off of higher salary for less fringes. Whatever it is called, it is still a temp job. "Contracting" implies a negotiation for a fixed price for specific deliverables; if those deliverables are X warm bodies at Y dollars per hour apiece, the agency is a contractor, but the temps it employs are salaried employees, not contractors. If you negotiate a contract to complete a specific bit of work for a specific price, and your only responsibility to the client is delivery of the end product, not how that end product is produced, you are a contractor. Why does all this matter, and why is it not just quibbling over trifles? Because experience as a salaried temp does not equate to experience as a contractor; the latter implies an entire range of skills that are necessary in some positions, and sadly lacking in many IT workers who call themselves contractors. > If I work for an agency and report to a third party, to me that is a> > contractor. Is that not interpretted as a contractor?> > I always made the > determination that I would not discuss gigs that> were planned for less than > six months and several gigs went close to> two years. It was almost normal > that my contract was extended> multiple > times.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and > Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites _ Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
This conversation needs to go to a general technical writing list, aka TCP or TECHWR-L, as someone mentioned. I did not realize until recently this was on framers and not techwr-l, and I'll be un-magnimonious and in part blame the interface to this yahoo mail. To any who I inconvenienced, I apologize. Let's move it along, and not bug people who are here to read about Framemaker only, which is an subset topic of technical writing that overlaps with other disciplines as well. --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are situations in which being a full-time employee is more > advantageous than being a contractor. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
> There are situations in which being a full-time employee is more > advantageous than being a contractor. I don't know that training > would be one of them, because a lot depends on the quality of > training, and how transferrable the skills are. It also depends on > how close a fit the training is for the learning style of the > learner. It was my criteria for taking the F/T position. > Only 10 jobs in 18+ years? That is an impressive record for a > contractor. It may be that there are different shades of meaning in > our interpretations of the term "contractor." If I work for an agency and report to a third party, to me that is a contractor. Is that not interpretted as a contractor? I always made the determination that I would not discuss gigs that were planned for less than six months and several gigs went close to two years. It was almost normal that my contract was extended multiple times. John Posada Senior Technical Writer "They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever. So far, so good." ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
It is almost comical to see a job description that stresses "knowledge of project management," apparently a euphemism for "we have to work 70 hours a week withut extra compensation to make the deadline," when the same job tends to exclude those with experience as PMs. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 07:45:03 -0700> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I've seen the same thing. It's too bad, because a tech writer with> those skills is more likely to understand the development process in my> view.> > --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > Similarly, if you have spent the last three or four> > years as a project manager, and are now applying for a developer or> > tech writer position, you are almost guaranteed to be considered a> > potential adversary, sight unseen.> > > > Why would anyone with experience as a manager want a developer or> > tech writer position?> > http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/> technical writing | consulting | development> > __> Do You Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com _ Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today. http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
There are situations in which being a full-time employee is more advantageous than being a contractor. I don't know that training would be one of them, because a lot depends on the quality of training, and how transferrable the skills are. It also depends on how close a fit the training is for the learning style of the learner. Only 10 jobs in 18+ years? That is an impressive record for a contractor. It may be that there are different shades of meaning in our interpretations of the term "contractor." http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 07:57:49 -0700> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > > Contract exclusively, preferably three- to six-month. Contractors> > tend to be more fully focused on task completion, and doing the job> > right, both of which suit my inclinations perfectly. "Full-time"> > work becomes more a social issue, in which the most importance is> > Allow mw to offer a different perspective without disputing what> Chris says, except to say it's not as black and white as he makes it> out to be.> > > Why would anyone with experience as a manager want a developer or> > tech writer position? More jobs, more opportunities, less hassle,> > less effort. Lots of IT people switch from doer to manager and> > back. Keeps up the job interest, keeps it challenging, a myriad of> > reasons. Most work as contractors, and politely decline offers of> > "full-time" work as the equivalent of being purchased as a "wage> > slave" by an organization that clearly understands it can more> > easily manipulate its employees than it can manipulate contractors.> > A gold star, an Employee-of-the-Month certificate, recognition,> > congratulations on a job well-done, flattery, perhaps even a> > favored parking spot for a month--have meaning only to those many> > contractors refer to as "lifers."> > I was a contractor for 18+ years at over 10 gigs with some> blue-ribbon companies, so I think I paid my contractor-dues.> > Yes, as an employee, there is the gold star, certificates, corporate> culture/drinking the koolaid mentality and sometimes, the cover of> the corporate magazine (me in this quarter). I can take that stuff or> leave it.> > I'm currently an employee of a Fortune 500 IT company; EMC (two years> this coming April). Why did I jump the fence? I'd heard that EMC was> strong on training. So, while I churn out user guides, installation> manuals, and such, I can also take advantage of a wide range of> training opportunities that I would not have been able to afford.> What kind of training? > - ITIL Foundation Certification> - Six Sigma Greenbelt with a project in the works> - UML courses> - Human Factors courses> - DITA and Usability bootcamps> - UNIX and Linux college courses> - The ability to set corporate standards through online help and 508> standards committes> - others> > All 100% paid while working from home 4-5 days a week.> > Granted...not all companies offer opportunities. However, find the> right one and you can take advantage of things they offer as they do> so with you.> > John Posada> Senior Technical Writer> > "They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.> So far, so good." _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook – together at last. Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
> Contract exclusively, preferably three- to six-month. Contractors > tend to be more fully focused on task completion, and doing the job > right, both of which suit my inclinations perfectly. "Full-time" > work becomes more a social issue, in which the most importance is Allow mw to offer a different perspective without disputing what Chris says, except to say it's not as black and white as he makes it out to be. > Why would anyone with experience as a manager want a developer or > tech writer position? More jobs, more opportunities, less hassle, > less effort. Lots of IT people switch from doer to manager and > back. Keeps up the job interest, keeps it challenging, a myriad of > reasons. Most work as contractors, and politely decline offers of > "full-time" work as the equivalent of being purchased as a "wage > slave" by an organization that clearly understands it can more > easily manipulate its employees than it can manipulate contractors. > A gold star, an Employee-of-the-Month certificate, recognition, > congratulations on a job well-done, flattery, perhaps even a > favored parking spot for a month--have meaning only to those many > contractors refer to as "lifers." I was a contractor for 18+ years at over 10 gigs with some blue-ribbon companies, so I think I paid my contractor-dues. Yes, as an employee, there is the gold star, certificates, corporate culture/drinking the koolaid mentality and sometimes, the cover of the corporate magazine (me in this quarter). I can take that stuff or leave it. I'm currently an employee of a Fortune 500 IT company; EMC (two years this coming April). Why did I jump the fence? I'd heard that EMC was strong on training. So, while I churn out user guides, installation manuals, and such, I can also take advantage of a wide range of training opportunities that I would not have been able to afford. What kind of training? - ITIL Foundation Certification - Six Sigma Greenbelt with a project in the works - UML courses - Human Factors courses - DITA and Usability bootcamps - UNIX and Linux college courses - The ability to set corporate standards through online help and 508 standards committes - others All 100% paid while working from home 4-5 days a week. Granted...not all companies offer opportunities. However, find the right one and you can take advantage of things they offer as they do so with you. John Posada Senior Technical Writer "They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever. So far, so good." ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Contract exclusively, preferably three- to six-month. Contractors tend to be more fully focused on task completion, and doing the job right, both of which suit my inclinations perfectly. "Full-time" work becomes more a social issue, in which the most importance is attached to "fitting in with the existing culture." Because a substantial part of my training is to create those cultures, I have a much different perspective on them. Example; education. If the hiring manager has a BS, anyone with a more advanced degree will be considered a potential rival--regardless of what positive contribution he or she might make to the organization. Similarly, if you have spent the last three or four years as a project manager, and are now applying for a developer or tech writer position, you are almost guaranteed to be considered a potential adversary, sight unseen. Why would anyone with experience as a manager want a developer or tech writer position? More jobs, more opportunities, less hassle, less effort. Lots of IT people switch from doer to manager and back. Keeps up the job interest, keeps it challenging, a myriad of reasons. Most work as contractors, and politely decline offers of "full-time" work as the equivalent of being purchased as a "wage slave" by an organization that clearly understands it can more easily manipulate its employees than it can manipulate contractors. A gold star, an Employee-of-the-Month certificate, recognition, congratulations on a job well-done, flattery, perhaps even a favored parking spot for a month--have meaning only to those many contractors refer to as "lifers." http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:24:48 -0700> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Interesting. All of this has helped me with an upcoming article on this> topic. It sounds like you've had some industry experience. If you don't> mind me asking, do you normally seek contract or full-time work? Trying> to make that decision here myself.> > --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > > > Not really. Some agile programmers specialize in a perpetual> > work-in-process, sometimes with 20-30 programmers building a software> > application that seems a moving target, with "new and unanticipated> > requirements" surfacing frequently. It is in the best interest of the> > developer to cater to change (one of the basic mottos of Extreme> > Programming is "Embrace Change"), and the more "requirements" change,> > for whatever reason, the less pressure to "complete the project." > > > > From the perspective of a developer, each iteration is "completion,"> > because they are paid on a regular basis, not for completion of the> > project. Project managers use various carrot-and-stick techniques to> > try to keep control of the situation, with less than impressive> > results.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design,> > Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online> > Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 08:59:44 -0700>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs>> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];> > framers@lists.frameusers.com> > For any project that size, won't it> > take some months for it to> complete, as it will for the docs to be> > done, which means that the TW> is first going to be assembling> > information and writing known parts of> the doc, and then expanding> > to write as parts of the software become> formalized?> > ---> > Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > I said that in an> > ambiguous, undefined software project> > (which many, including> > multi-million dollar, tend to be), it is> > pointless to create> > documentation of an application that may--and> > probably> > will--change at the next iteration.> > >> > http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/> technical writing |> > consulting | development> >> > __> Do You Yahoo!?>> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >> > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _> > Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word> > scramble challenge with star power.> >> http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlm
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Again, that is a design progroblem, not a documentation problem. Good GUI design never, ever results in an interface that doesn't make sense. If it did, it wouldn't be good GUI design. On the typical large-scale project, GUI designers serve the dual function of designers and usability experts; if they crank out spiffy GUIs that fail, they won't be working very long. Business competition has a tendency to validate Darwin.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:48:05 -0700> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > A product can have good design, and good programming, and still be> inadequate for users.> > How can that be, you ask?> > Technically speaking, it may be doing what its creators think it> should, and it may be well-created. It may be disorganized, and it may> not address the user's needs, and that's where TWs come in.> > We are the only group who sees the application, from start to finish,> from a user perspective. Therefore we are able to offer sanity checks:> > - This interface doesn't make sense.> - Although the app is well-designed, in this context it becomes slow or> crashes, and in our view, users will come this way often.> - The task we're designing this for is too narrow/too broad.> > --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > Exactly. And that is in the province of the developer, the> > programmers, and the GUI designers. Using TW to cover up poor design> > and inadequate programming is not particularly useful for> > anyone.> > http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/> technical writing | consulting | development> > __> Do You Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com _ Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today. http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Do tell :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon McLean Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:27 AM Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I spy a Mark Twain quote in your email signature... Are you familiar with the one about sarcasm? Gordon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ers. com] On Behalf Of Whites Sent: 01 November 2007 02:49 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs Amen. On Oct 31, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Peter Gold wrote: > I've been deleting messages on this thread for some time because it's > not relevant to me. ++ There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. - Twain ++ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/gordon.mclean%40grah amte chnology.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. This email (and any attachments) is private and confidential, and is intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this communication in error please remove it and inform us via telephone or email. Although we take all possible steps to ensure mail and attachments are free from malicious content, malware and viruses, we cannot accept any responsibility whatsoever for any changes to content outwith our administrative bounds. The views represented within this mail are solely the view of the author and do not reflect the views of the organisation as a whole. Graham Technology plc Registered in Scotland company no. SC143434 Registered Office India of Inchinnan, Renfrewshire, Scotland PA4 9LH http://www.grahamtechnology.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/jim.pinkham%40voith. com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I spy a Mark Twain quote in your email signature... Are you familiar with the one about sarcasm? Gordon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] com] On Behalf Of Whites Sent: 01 November 2007 02:49 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs Amen. On Oct 31, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Peter Gold wrote: > I've been deleting messages on this thread for some time because it's > not relevant to me. ++ There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. - Twain ++ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/gordon.mclean%40grahamte chnology.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. This email (and any attachments) is private and confidential, and is intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this communication in error please remove it and inform us via telephone or email. Although we take all possible steps to ensure mail and attachments are free from malicious content, malware and viruses, we cannot accept any responsibility whatsoever for any changes to content outwith our administrative bounds. The views represented within this mail are solely the view of the author and do not reflect the views of the organisation as a whole. Graham Technology plc Registered in Scotland company no. SC143434 Registered Office India of Inchinnan, Renfrewshire, Scotland PA4 9LH http://www.grahamtechnology.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I'm on that list too Peter, I find both to be engaging at different times. Glad to hear that someone is using the delete key though! Gordon P.S. TechCommPro is currently discussing the horror of the fact that postings there may be being archived by another service. Not really that engaging at the moment! ;-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] com] On Behalf Of Peter Gold Sent: 31 October 2007 16:48 To: Chris Borokowski Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs Hi, folks: I've been deleting messages on this thread for some time because it's not relevant to me. However, you all might find a more engaging community at techcommpros, the new tech writers listserv, that branched off techwr-l some time ago. Here's the contact: To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://techcommpros.com/mailman/listinfo/tcp_techcommpros.com or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, Peter ___ Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/gordon.mclean%40grahamte chnology.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. This email (and any attachments) is private and confidential, and is intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this communication in error please remove it and inform us via telephone or email. Although we take all possible steps to ensure mail and attachments are free from malicious content, malware and viruses, we cannot accept any responsibility whatsoever for any changes to content outwith our administrative bounds. The views represented within this mail are solely the view of the author and do not reflect the views of the organisation as a whole. Graham Technology plc Registered in Scotland company no. SC143434 Registered Office India of Inchinnan, Renfrewshire, Scotland PA4 9LH http://www.grahamtechnology.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
Amen. On Oct 31, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Peter Gold wrote: I've been deleting messages on this thread for some time because it's not relevant to me. ++ There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. - Twain ++ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
Hi, folks: I've been deleting messages on this thread for some time because it's not relevant to me. However, you all might find a more engaging community at techcommpros, the new tech writers listserv, that branched off techwr-l some time ago. Here's the contact: To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://techcommpros.com/mailman/listinfo/tcp_techcommpros.com or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, Peter ___ Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
To me it seems obvious that getting TWs involved in the whole of the process is a necessary step, as is (what someone else mentioned) getting TWs to write less-wordy, more immediately-parseable instructions. If agile development allows that, it could be fun and interesting. I'm leery of trends like agile or extreme programming because when you analyze them, they are largely a formalization of an ad hoc practice, and so don't apply anywhere. Too often I fear I'm buying into someone else's marketing, when there's a simpler route to the truth. --- Susan Modlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been working in and with agile development groups as > a writer or doc manager since late in the last century. When I first > heard about agile, I thought it was the devil's spawn, but it hasn't > turned out that way at all. In my experience, a writer in a well-run > agile environment can be involved from day one of the first iteration > all the way through to delivery of a final product -- and not just > writing and rewriting the same stuff over and over again. In fact, I > find that I don't spend as much time > writing as I once did. However, as an integral part of the > development > organization, I have no shortage of interesting and impactful > (terrible > word) tasks on my plate. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
So, is there a "Tech Writers in Agile Dev" mailing list? I'm a member of the Agile Usability one but haven't, yet, stumbled across a scrum of writers (sorry!). Gordon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] com] On Behalf Of Susan Modlin Sent: 31 October 2007 00:03 To: Technical Writer; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs I've followed this thread with interest, even though it has precious little to do with FrameMaker. My perspective differs somewhat from what I've seen so far in the discussion. I've been working in and with agile development groups as a writer or doc manager since late in the last century. When I first heard about agile, I thought it was the devil's spawn, but it hasn't turned out that way at all. In my experience, a writer in a well-run agile environment can be involved from day one of the first iteration all the way through to delivery of a final product -- and not just writing and rewriting the same stuff over and over again. In fact, I find that I don't spend as much time writing as I once did. However, as an integral part of the development organization, I have no shortage of interesting and impactful (terrible word) tasks on my plate. As a side note, I'm a certified (and very interested) scrum master. ...Susan This email (and any attachments) is private and confidential, and is intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this communication in error please remove it and inform us via telephone or email. Although we take all possible steps to ensure mail and attachments are free from malicious content, malware and viruses, we cannot accept any responsibility whatsoever for any changes to content outwith our administrative bounds. The views represented within this mail are solely the view of the author and do not reflect the views of the organisation as a whole. Graham Technology plc Registered in Scotland company no. SC143434 Registered Office India of Inchinnan, Renfrewshire, Scotland PA4 9LH http://www.grahamtechnology.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
Agreed. Rene Susan Modlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've been working in and with agile development groups as a writer or doc manager since late in the last century. When I first heard about agile, I thought it was the devil's spawn, but it hasn't turned out that way at all. In my experience, a writer in a well-run agile environment can be involved from day one of the first iteration all the way through to delivery of a final product -- and not just writing and rewriting the same stuff over and over again. In fact, I find that I don't spend as much time writing as I once did. However, as an integral part of the development organization, I have no shortage of interesting and impactful (terrible word) tasks on my plate. ...Susan - Original Message From: Technical Writer To: Leslie Schwartz ; framers@lists.frameusers.com Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 8:52:21 AM Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs The experience of one person, or even a handful, do not in any way negate an obvious and growing trend in the software industry--directly related to "agile" development--to consider TW involvement as pointless until the final iteration. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
I've followed this thread with interest, even though it has precious little to do with FrameMaker. My perspective differs somewhat from what I've seen so far in the discussion. I've been working in and with agile development groups as a writer or doc manager since late in the last century. When I first heard about agile, I thought it was the devil's spawn, but it hasn't turned out that way at all. In my experience, a writer in a well-run agile environment can be involved from day one of the first iteration all the way through to delivery of a final product -- and not just writing and rewriting the same stuff over and over again. In fact, I find that I don't spend as much time writing as I once did. However, as an integral part of the development organization, I have no shortage of interesting and impactful (terrible word) tasks on my plate. As a side note, I'm a certified (and very interested) scrum master. ...Susan - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; framers@lists.frameusers.com Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 8:52:21 AM Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs The experience of one person, or even a handful, do not in any way negate an obvious and growing trend in the software industry--directly related to "agile" development--to consider TW involvement as pointless until the final iteration. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
There is no such trend. Signing off on this conversation. Your welcome to the last word on it. - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; framers@lists.frameusers.com Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 8:52:21 AM Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs The experience of one person, or even a handful, do not in any way negate an obvious and growing trend in the software industry--directly related to "agile" development--to consider TW involvement as pointless until the final iteration. Yes, there are organizations that still do business as they did 20 or 30 years ago, just as there are still organizations using COBOL, SNOBOL, and other odd applications. If their system works, more power to them, and to the TWs they employ. The difference is in whether or not the organization is developing software, or creating an application that "implements the vision" of a handful of movers and shakers at the top. That handful can do as they please, whether or not it is of long-term benefit to the organization. For software developed in a competitive marketplace, the role of the TW is rapidly changing to a diminished involvement. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:14:18 -0500 This may be your experience, in my experience in fact there is no IF about it, I just put it that way to be gentile. Our documents pre-sage multi-mullion dollar contracts (at each stage of the project) and there is always plenty of fuzzy concepts to go around at the early stages. No documents, no contracts. TWs and in particular the directors, managers are involved at these stages. Documentation is a 100% necessary adjunct to business development from the outset. From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:29 PM To: Leslie H Schwartz; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs That is a very big if. A full partner participant-stakeholder, or more likely the department manager? It is more likely that the software developers, business analysts, and the project manager are collaborating to get a decent set of requirements down. At that stage, TWs have no place, whether department managers, full partner participant-stakeholders, or something else. When the requirements are determined, and possibly after several iterations, possibly after a prototype is up and running, TWs might be brought in. Even at that stage, it is early, because the GUI crew may not have the interface coded, the developers might not have the functionality carved in stone, and everything is still uncertain (in regards to exactly what the final product will be and do). TWs complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until the final iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until there is little or no possibility of changes to the end product, there is little point in generating documentation that might become obsolete at the next iteration. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: framers@lists.frameusers.com Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with. - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; framers@lists.frameusers.com Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AM Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enter
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
A product can have good design, and good programming, and still be inadequate for users. How can that be, you ask? Technically speaking, it may be doing what its creators think it should, and it may be well-created. It may be disorganized, and it may not address the user's needs, and that's where TWs come in. We are the only group who sees the application, from start to finish, from a user perspective. Therefore we are able to offer sanity checks: - This interface doesn't make sense. - Although the app is well-designed, in this context it becomes slow or crashes, and in our view, users will come this way often. - The task we're designing this for is too narrow/too broad. --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Exactly. And that is in the province of the developer, the > programmers, and the GUI designers. Using TW to cover up poor design > and inadequate programming is not particularly useful for > anyone. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Exactly. And that is in the province of the developer, the programmers, and the GUI designers. Using TW to cover up poor design and inadequate programming is not particularly useful for anyone.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:08:58 -0700> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > As users become more technically savvy, they become less dependent on> vague manuals and more interested in software with a smooth, intuitive,> powerful interface and reliable function. See blog post on this issue:> > http://user-advocacy.blogspot.com/2007/10/users-replacing-specialists-in-it-and.html> > --- Rene Stephenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > The involvement of TW/doc mgr early on is not initially> > for writing the doc as muc as it is for user advocacy, sanity checks> > of UIS or other specs from a user-driven perspective, as well as> > getting buy-in and resource allocation far enough in advance that> > creating a remotely usable document is at all feasible. The later> > the TW is inserted into the process, the harder it is to create> > anything better than basic functionally-driven documents.> > > > > http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/> technical writing | consulting | development> > __> Do You Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com _ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
This statement makes the most sense when considered in the light of how the technology industry has expanded. We now have many small roles contributing to a project or part of one, but what's missing is people who can glue it all together according to some consistent idea. Making the product work for the user is one such idea, and TWs are the best suited toward that role. Coincidentally, manuals are decreasing in importance as users know more about the technology. WTFM (write the fine manual) isn't going to cut it any more, and there's new ground to conquer. It'll be fun, honest. --- Rene Stephenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Creating user assistance is indeed a necessary task, but it is only > one of many that TWs perform. User advocacy getting the user > expectations back up the chain into the ears of those who can impact > what the users end up getting is at least as important as the more > common task of user assistance. If all the user needs is assistance, > they'll just ring off the hook with tech support or customer service. > User advocacy ensures higher quality products that lower call volume > to tech support and customer service. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
This is a good idea, and I'll try it. I end up attending most because in my little world, seeing the gestures and facial expressions can tell me a lot, but often most of that knowledge shouldn't go in the docs anyway :) --- Rene Stephenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One workable solution is to let the TW teleconference into the > meeting, regardless of whether the TW is in cubicle or offsite. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
As users become more technically savvy, they become less dependent on vague manuals and more interested in software with a smooth, intuitive, powerful interface and reliable function. See blog post on this issue: http://user-advocacy.blogspot.com/2007/10/users-replacing-specialists-in-it-and.html --- Rene Stephenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The involvement of TW/doc mgr early on is not initially > for writing the doc as muc as it is for user advocacy, sanity checks > of UIS or other specs from a user-driven perspective, as well as > getting buy-in and resource allocation far enough in advance that > creating a remotely usable document is at all feasible. The later > the TW is inserted into the process, the harder it is to create > anything better than basic functionally-driven documents. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Enterprise Websites ----------------- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:46:00 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com TW dept managers or directors in particular do have a place in developmental stages. They provide user advocacy in the initial stages, when the development is most nebulous, providing direction and focus toward the common goal of the team: happy customers who like the product and want to buy more. From the TW perspective, the TW mgr/dir gathers info about headcount impact, resource allocation dynamics, etc. You simply cannot categorically state that TWs have no place at any point in a project, because there are too many successful use cases that prove to the contrary, at least 3 of my previous gigs being examples thereof. It depends on the pace of development and the length of the product life cycle, among other things. The faster the products develop and the shorter the product life cycle is, the more critical it is to have TW integration at the earliest phase. Creating user assistance is indeed a necessary task, but it is only one of many that TWs perform. User advocacy getting the user expectations back up the chain into the ears of those who can impact what the users end up getting is at least as important as the more common task of user assistance. If all the user needs is assistance, they'll just ring off the hook with tech support or customer service. User advocacy ensures higher quality products that lower call volume to tech support and customer service. Writing good, usable Help in terms that the user understands is another way to drop the call volume. But, rely on either without the other and you don't reap the maximum benefit of TW staff. Rene Stephenson Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That is a very big if. A full partner participant-stakeholder, or more likely the department manager? It is more likely that the software developers, business analysts, and the project manager are collaborating to get a decent set of requirements down. At that stage, TWs have no place, whether department managers, full partner participant-stakeholders, or something else. When the requirements are determined, and possibly after several iterations, possibly after a prototype is up and running, TWs might be brought in. Even at that stage, it is early, because the GUI crew may not have the interface coded, the developers might not have the functionality carved in stone, and everything is still uncertain (in regards to exactly what the final product will be and do). TWs complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until the final iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until there is little or no possibility of changes to the end product, there is little point in generating documentation that might become obsolete at the next iteration. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: framers@lists.frameusers.com Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with. - Original Message From: Technical Writer To: Leslie Schwartz ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AMSubject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500> > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions i
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
For any project that size, won't it take some months for it to complete, as it will for the docs to be done, which means that the TW is first going to be assembling information and writing known parts of the doc, and then expanding to write as parts of the software become formalized? --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I said that in an ambiguous, undefined software project > (which many, including multi-million dollar, tend to be), it is > pointless to create documentation of an application that may--and > probably will--change at the next iteration. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Luckily, that isn't all they do. Many are employed writing policies and procedures and internal business documentation. Any function that requires explaining concepts understood within a certain skill set that is a minority role in a company is a TW role. Personally, I find it hard to separate the different roles. A well-organized business produces a well-organized product, which can then be easily introduced to the user. If a TW is able to give that feedback during development, and make the product better, the doc gets simpler and bottom line goes up. This is why I see the role of TWs as expanding, not decreasing, in the future. --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > TWs complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until > the final iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until > there is little or no possibility of changes to the end product, > there is little point in generating documentation that might become > obsolete at the next iteration. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
One role I've found myself in is that of documentation manager, or the person who keeps track of business process, finds what must be organized, and then documents it and finds a sensible hierarchy for those docs, as well as varied delivery methods. It's a fun role. You get to see almost all that goes on, learn a lot, and don't have that unhealthy feeling of waiting around the periphery for an SME to decide to tell you something. They get to know you on a day-to-day basis instead. --- Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > TWs and in particular the directors, managers are involved at these > stages. Documentation is a 100% necessary adjunct to business > development from the outset. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
esDate: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED], I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with.- Original Message From: Technical Writer To: Leslie Schwartz ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AMSubject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsI agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500> > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no> big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to have any real value it will be to share our perspectives with> others and learn something about points of view's entirely different than our own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respect.> > > My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW involved early on, but it’s a waste of time for them to sit all the> way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each meeting.> > Marketing requirements documents and engineering specification documents, if they are adequately written will help the TW formulate> the user documentation at a fairly early stage, but the bulk of the documentation effort comes towards the end of the development> cycle. And ideally the writer of the user guide if that is they type of documentation we are discussing now, should be a> knowledgeable user with some fresh insights into the learning curve the novice user will face, and some empathy for that new user.> > Ignoring the need for documentation, putting it off until the last moment is a formula for poor quality documentation.> > - In my humble opinion.> > Have a great work week!> > Leslie> > > -Original Message-> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On> Behalf Of Technical Writer> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 5:47 PM> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > > Well, a difference of opinion is what makes a horse race. Iterative software methods do not require iterative documentation methods;> in most cases, documentation before the last iteration is considered both wasteful and useless. While I have a great deal of respect> for Steve McConnell, proposing early draft user guides as a replacement for requirement specs is a bit off the road. > > If you develop software, and intend to use early draft user guides instead of requirements, you are going to be greeting the folks> at Wal-Mart rather than trying to pull back a contract or two from Bangalore. The statement is at odds with most developers' (and> most business analysts') understanding of "requirements." Putting an occasional "agile" into a sentence doesn't make the process any> more reasonable. > > I didn't invent the idea of ignoring documentation until the final product is ready (or almost ready) to ship. Far more intelligent,> competent, and capable people than me have decided that "involving TWs from the early stages of development" is only useful when the> end product is carved in stone before the first line of code is written. That, for better of worse, is rarely the case.> > Lastly, given that about a third of all software projects, agile or otherwise, fail so badly they are abandoned, if you ignore> documentation completely, you have a one in three chance of coming out ahead when the project flops because you have at least saved> the cost of documentation.> http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Tec
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
The experience of one person, or even a handful, do not in any way negate an obvious and growing trend in the software industry--directly related to "agile" development--to consider TW involvement as pointless until the final iteration. Yes, there are organizations that still do business as they did 20 or 30 years ago, just as there are still organizations using COBOL, SNOBOL, and other odd applications. If their system works, more power to them, and to the TWs they employ. The difference is in whether or not the organization is developing software, or creating an application that "implements the vision" of a handful of movers and shakers at the top. That handful can do as they please, whether or not it is of long-term benefit to the organization. For software developed in a competitive marketplace, the role of the TW is rapidly changing to a diminished involvement. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:14:18 -0500 This may be your experience, in my experience in fact there is no IF about it, I just put it that way to be gentile. Our documents pre-sage multi-mullion dollar contracts (at each stage of the project) and there is always plenty of fuzzy concepts to go around at the early stages. No documents, no contracts. TWs and in particular the directors, managers are involved at these stages. Documentation is a 100% necessary adjunct to business development from the outset. From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:29 PMTo: Leslie H Schwartz; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs That is a very big if. A full partner participant-stakeholder, or more likely the department manager? It is more likely that the software developers, business analysts, and the project manager are collaborating to get a decent set of requirements down. At that stage, TWs have no place, whether department managers, full partner participant-stakeholders, or something else. When the requirements are determined, and possibly after several iterations, possibly after a prototype is up and running, TWs might be brought in. Even at that stage, it is early, because the GUI crew may not have the interface coded, the developers might not have the functionality carved in stone, and everything is still uncertain (in regards to exactly what the final product will be and do). TWs complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until the final iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until there is little or no possibility of changes to the end product, there is little point in generating documentation that might become obsolete at the next iteration. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: framers@lists.frameusers.com Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with. - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AMSubject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsI agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500> > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no> big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to h
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
One workable solution is to let the TW teleconference into the meeting, regardless of whether the TW is in cubicle or offsite. Then, the TW can keep their end on mute and listen for useful tidbits while making use of the time most effectively. That has worked very well for me at several companies, including my current one. If for whatever reason I have to be IN the conference room for a meeting that I know will only be partially relevant, I take my laptop along, sit at an angle to the rest of the group, have one window open for notetaking, and work in FM in a pane beside my notetaking window. My 2¢ Rene Stephenson Chris Borokowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You really hit the nail on the head. Meetings are brain-sapping enough when important information is actually being conveyed, but most people who are on the CC: list for meetings are being given a free hourlong zone-out. Keep the poor TWs out of the unnecessary meetings, or they'll become office shooters. Instead, put them to use in usability (currently dominated by glorified photoshop jockeys in too many places) or another capacity suited to their abilities. --- Leslie Schwartz wrote: > My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW > involved early on, but its a waste of time for them to sit all the > way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each > meeting. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/rinnie1%40yahoo.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
TW dept managers or directors in particular do have a place in developmental stages. They provide user advocacy in the initial stages, when the development is most nebulous, providing direction and focus toward the common goal of the team: happy customers who like the product and want to buy more. From the TW perspective, the TW mgr/dir gathers info about headcount impact, resource allocation dynamics, etc. You simply cannot categorically state that TWs have no place at any point in a project, because there are too many successful use cases that prove to the contrary, at least 3 of my previous gigs being examples thereof. It depends on the pace of development and the length of the product life cycle, among other things. The faster the products develop and the shorter the product life cycle is, the more critical it is to have TW integration at the earliest phase. Creating user assistance is indeed a necessary task, but it is only one of many that TWs perform. User advocacy getting the user expectations back up the chain into the ears of those who can impact what the users end up getting is at least as important as the more common task of user assistance. If all the user needs is assistance, they'll just ring off the hook with tech support or customer service. User advocacy ensures higher quality products that lower call volume to tech support and customer service. Writing good, usable Help in terms that the user understands is another way to drop the call volume. But, rely on either without the other and you don't reap the maximum benefit of TW staff. Rene Stephenson Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That is a very big if. A full partner participant-stakeholder, or more likely the department manager? It is more likely that the software developers, business analysts, and the project manager are collaborating to get a decent set of requirements down. At that stage, TWs have no place, whether department managers, full partner participant-stakeholders, or something else. When the requirements are determined, and possibly after several iterations, possibly after a prototype is up and running, TWs might be brought in. Even at that stage, it is early, because the GUI crew may not have the interface coded, the developers might not have the functionality carved in stone, and everything is still uncertain (in regards to exactly what the final product will be and do). TWs complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until the final iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until there is little or no possibility of changes to the end product, there is little point in generating documentation that might become obsolete at the next iteration. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: framers@lists.frameusers.com Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with. - Original Message From: Technical Writer To: Leslie Schwartz ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AMSubject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500> > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no> big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to have any real value it will be to share our perspectives with> others and learn something about points of view's entirely different than our own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respec
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I previously worked at a company where the tech writer, in collaboration with development, was responsible for designing and writing the RS and the FS. The docs were highly detailed (about 3000 printed pages per year for a single writer), and were used to not only output and update specifications, but also online help and QA test cases--from a single source. It was initially difficult to maintain and design, but the beauty of it was that any change went through the tw, since all levels in the process were absolutely dependent on it. The writer never missed a trick. Following a single rigid methodology is like being stuck in a box. There is no single process that anyone should absolutely follow--we should constantly strive for new ideas if the results support them. S. Pollock Siemens PLM Software > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:29:15 -0400> CC: > Subject: RE: radical revamping > of techpubs> > > That is a very big if. A full partner > participant-stakeholder, or more likely the department manager? It is more > likely that the software developers, business analysts, and the project > manager are collaborating to get a decent set of requirements down. At that > stage, TWs have no place, whether department managers, full partner > participant-stakeholders, or something else.> > When the requirements are > determined, and possibly after several iterations, possibly after a prototype > is up and running, TWs might be brought in. Even at that stage, it is early, > because the GUI crew may not have the interface coded, the developers might > not have the functionality carved in stone, and everything is still uncertain > (in regards to exactly what the final product will be and do).> > TWs > complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until the final > iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until there is little or > no possibility of changes to the end product, there is little point in > generating documentation that might become obsolete at the next iteration.> > > http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and > Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> > > > Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: radical > revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: framers@lists.frameusers.com> > > > > > Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - > stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are > discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the > uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are > going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal > with.> - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]>To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AMSubject: RE: radical revamping of > techpubs> > I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes > back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software > requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about > what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it > is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only > useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell > the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on > the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. > http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and > Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500> > I belong to several message - > interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions in a > bombastic manner. So its no> big deal to see that happening here. But if this > discussion is to have any real value it will be to share our perspectives > with> others and learn something about points of view's entirely different > than our own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respect.> > > My view > and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW involved early on, > but it’s a waste of time for them to sit all the> way through each meeting, > and for the entire duration of each meeting.> > Marketing requirements > documents and engineering specification d
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
This may be your experience, in my experience in fact there is no IF about it, I just put it that way to be gentile. Our documents pre-sage multi-mullion dollar contracts (at each stage of the project) and there is always plenty of fuzzy concepts to go around at the early stages. No documents, no contracts. TWs and in particular the directors, managers are involved at these stages. Documentation is a 100% necessary adjunct to business development from the outset. From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:29 PM To: Leslie H Schwartz; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs That is a very big if. A full partner participant-stakeholder, or more likely the department manager? It is more likely that the software developers, business analysts, and the project manager are collaborating to get a decent set of requirements down. At that stage, TWs have no place, whether department managers, full partner participant-stakeholders, or something else. When the requirements are determined, and possibly after several iterations, possibly after a prototype is up and running, TWs might be brought in. Even at that stage, it is early, because the GUI crew may not have the interface coded, the developers might not have the functionality carved in stone, and everything is still uncertain (in regards to exactly what the final product will be and do). TWs complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until the final iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until there is little or no possibility of changes to the end product, there is little point in generating documentation that might become obsolete at the next iteration. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites _ Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: framers@lists.frameusers.com Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with. - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; framers@lists.frameusers.com Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AM Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com > Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500 > > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people > give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no > big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to have any > real value it will be to share our perspectives with > others and learn something about points of view's entirely different than our > own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respect. > > > My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW involved > early on, but it's a waste of time for them to sit all the > way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each meeting. > > Marketing requirements documents and engineering specification documents, if > they are adequately written will help the TW formulate > the user documentation at a fairly early stage, but the bulk of the > documentation effort comes towards the end of the development > cycle. And ideally the writer of the user guide if that is they type of > documentation we are discussing now, should be a > knowledgeable user with some fresh insights into the learning curve the > novice user will face, and some empathy for that new user. > > Ignoring the need for documentation, putting it off until the last moment is > a formula for p
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
That is a very big if. A full partner participant-stakeholder, or more likely the department manager? It is more likely that the software developers, business analysts, and the project manager are collaborating to get a decent set of requirements down. At that stage, TWs have no place, whether department managers, full partner participant-stakeholders, or something else. When the requirements are determined, and possibly after several iterations, possibly after a prototype is up and running, TWs might be brought in. Even at that stage, it is early, because the GUI crew may not have the interface coded, the developers might not have the functionality carved in stone, and everything is still uncertain (in regards to exactly what the final product will be and do). TWs complete a very necessary task; creating user assistance. Until the final iteration, until all the requirements have been met, until there is little or no possibility of changes to the end product, there is little point in generating documentation that might become obsolete at the next iteration. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:26:46 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: framers@lists.frameusers.com Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with. - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AMSubject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500> > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no> big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to have any real value it will be to share our perspectives with> others and learn something about points of view's entirely different than our own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respect.> > > My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW involved early on, but it’s a waste of time for them to sit all the> way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each meeting.> > Marketing requirements documents and engineering specification documents, if they are adequately written will help the TW formulate> the user documentation at a fairly early stage, but the bulk of the documentation effort comes towards the end of the development> cycle. And ideally the writer of the user guide if that is they type of documentation we are discussing now, should be a> knowledgeable user with some fresh insights into the learning curve the novice user will face, and some empathy for that new user.> > Ignoring the need for documentation, putting it off until the last moment is a formula for poor quality documentation.> > - In my humble opinion.> > Have a great work week!> > Leslie> > > -Original Message-> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On> Behalf Of Technical Writer> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 5:47 PM> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > > Well, a difference of opinion is what makes a horse race. Iterative software methods do not require iterative documentation methods;> in most cases, documentation before the last iteration is considered both wasteful and useless. While I have a great deal of respect> for Steve McConnell, proposing early draft user guides as a replacement for requirement spec
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
In my view, you're quite right. It's why I took on this career. By making users more powerful, we make technology evolve, and eliminate some of the techno-angst in the world. --- Kelly McDaniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I consider the technical writer to be the ultimate advocate for the > user. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I consider the technical writer to be the ultimate advocate for the user...Kelly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 12:35 PM To: Chris Borokowski; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs Hi, Chris and Ben, I like it too ... I am going to copy people inside our company on this concept. Z Chris Borokowski Chris Borokowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I like this idea, a lot. > > Instead of writing instructions out in a dry abstraction and passive > voice, explain how the application should work from a user perspective. > > What a little gem of an idea. Thanks for posting it. > > --- Ben Hechter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In fact, Steve McConnell (Code Complete) proposes early draft user guides as an agile replacement for requirements specs. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/kmcdaniel%40pavtech. com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Hi, Chris and Ben, I like it too ... I am going to copy people inside our company on this concept. Z Chris Borokowski Chris Borokowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I like this idea, a lot. > > Instead of writing instructions out in a dry abstraction and passive > voice, explain how the application should work from a user perspective. > > What a little gem of an idea. Thanks for posting it. > > --- Ben Hechter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In fact, Steve McConnell (Code Complete) proposes early draft user guides as an agile replacement for requirements specs. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
re: radical revamping of techpubs
I like this idea, a lot. Instead of writing instructions out in a dry abstraction and passive voice, explain how the application should work from a user perspective. What a little gem of an idea. Thanks for posting it. --- Ben Hechter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In fact, Steve McConnell (Code > Complete) proposes early draft user guides as an agile replacement > for requirements specs. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
You really hit the nail on the head. Meetings are brain-sapping enough when important information is actually being conveyed, but most people who are on the CC: list for meetings are being given a free hourlong zone-out. Keep the poor TWs out of the unnecessary meetings, or they'll become office shooters. Instead, put them to use in usability (currently dominated by glorified photoshop jockeys in too many places) or another capacity suited to their abilities. --- Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW > involved early on, but its a waste of time for them to sit all the > way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each > meeting. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
Actually, I disagee, if the TW is a full partner participant - stakeholder, or more likely the department manager in the scenario you are discussing, they should also participate early on to get the sense of the uncertainty and what those issues are, at the very least these issues are going to affect their scheduling and the expectations they have to deal with. - Original Message From: Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Leslie Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; framers@lists.frameusers.com Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:44:16 AM Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com > Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500 > > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people > give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no > big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to have any > real value it will be to share our perspectives with > others and learn something about points of view's entirely different than our > own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respect. > > > My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW involved > early on, but it’s a waste of time for them to sit all the > way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each meeting. > > Marketing requirements documents and engineering specification documents, if > they are adequately written will help the TW formulate > the user documentation at a fairly early stage, but the bulk of the > documentation effort comes towards the end of the development > cycle. And ideally the writer of the user guide if that is they type of > documentation we are discussing now, should be a > knowledgeable user with some fresh insights into the learning curve the > novice user will face, and some empathy for that new user. > > Ignoring the need for documentation, putting it off until the last moment is > a formula for poor quality documentation. > > - In my humble opinion. > > Have a great work week! > > Leslie > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Technical Writer > Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 5:47 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com > Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs > > > Well, a difference of opinion is what makes a horse race. Iterative software > methods do not require iterative documentation methods; > in most cases, documentation before the last iteration is considered both > wasteful and useless. While I have a great deal of respect > for Steve McConnell, proposing early draft user guides as a replacement for > requirement specs is a bit off the road. > > If you develop software, and intend to use early draft user guides instead of > requirements, you are going to be greeting the folks > at Wal-Mart rather than trying to pull back a contract or two from Bangalore. > The statement is at odds with most developers' (and > most business analysts') understanding of "requirements." Putting an > occasional "agile" into a sentence doesn't make the process any > more reasonable. > > I didn't invent the idea of ignoring documentation until the final product is > ready (or almost ready) to ship. Far more intelligent, > competent, and capable people than me have decided that "involving TWs from > the early stages of development" is only useful when the > end product is carved in stone before the first line of code is written. > That, for better of worse, is rarely the case. > > Lastly, given that about a third of all software projects, agile or > otherwise, fail so badly they are abandoned, if you ignore > documentation completely, you have a one in three chance of coming out ahead > when the project flops because you have at least saved > the cost of documentation. > http://ww
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I agree wholeheartedly. That is not the issue. The issue goes back to the BA interpretation of (and translation of) the software requirements. If there is a high level of certainty on the client side about what the finished product should be, TWs should start early. If not, and it is essentially a fishing expedition with ambiguous outcome, TWs are only useful at the last. Unfortunately, the "agile" methodologies strongly sell the sense of control to executives, pushing the idea that they can develop on the fly, adding and removing "requirements" as the executives see fit. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:10 -0500> > I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no> big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to have any real value it will be to share our perspectives with> others and learn something about points of view's entirely different than our own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respect.> > > My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW involved early on, but it’s a waste of time for them to sit all the> way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each meeting.> > Marketing requirements documents and engineering specification documents, if they are adequately written will help the TW formulate> the user documentation at a fairly early stage, but the bulk of the documentation effort comes towards the end of the development> cycle. And ideally the writer of the user guide if that is they type of documentation we are discussing now, should be a> knowledgeable user with some fresh insights into the learning curve the novice user will face, and some empathy for that new user.> > Ignoring the need for documentation, putting it off until the last moment is a formula for poor quality documentation.> > - In my humble opinion.> > Have a great work week!> > Leslie> > > -Original Message-> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On> Behalf Of Technical Writer> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 5:47 PM> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > > Well, a difference of opinion is what makes a horse race. Iterative software methods do not require iterative documentation methods;> in most cases, documentation before the last iteration is considered both wasteful and useless. While I have a great deal of respect> for Steve McConnell, proposing early draft user guides as a replacement for requirement specs is a bit off the road. > > If you develop software, and intend to use early draft user guides instead of requirements, you are going to be greeting the folks> at Wal-Mart rather than trying to pull back a contract or two from Bangalore. The statement is at odds with most developers' (and> most business analysts') understanding of "requirements." Putting an occasional "agile" into a sentence doesn't make the process any> more reasonable. > > I didn't invent the idea of ignoring documentation until the final product is ready (or almost ready) to ship. Far more intelligent,> competent, and capable people than me have decided that "involving TWs from the early stages of development" is only useful when the> end product is carved in stone before the first line of code is written. That, for better of worse, is rarely the case.> > Lastly, given that about a third of all software projects, agile or otherwise, fail so badly they are abandoned, if you ignore> documentation completely, you have a one in three chance of coming out ahead when the project flops because you have at least saved> the cost of documentation.> http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content -> Enterprise Websites> > > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:21:17 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:> [EMAIL PROTECTED], but I find the thread both:a) Off-topicb) Misleading. Iterative sofware methods require iterative> documentation methods, but by no means do they eliminate the parallel need for early draft user manuals. In fact, Steve McConnell> (Code Complete) proposes early draft user guides as an agile replacement for requirements specs.Ben> Because the application itself> is built in an iterative process, rather than > being carve
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I belong to several message - interest groups and I am used to hearing people give their opinions in a bombastic manner. So its no big deal to see that happening here. But if this discussion is to have any real value it will be to share our perspectives with others and learn something about points of view's entirely different than our own, which requires some tolerance and mutual respect. My view and experience is that it definitely helps to get the TW involved early on, but its a waste of time for them to sit all the way through each meeting, and for the entire duration of each meeting. Marketing requirements documents and engineering specification documents, if they are adequately written will help the TW formulate the user documentation at a fairly early stage, but the bulk of the documentation effort comes towards the end of the development cycle. And ideally the writer of the user guide if that is they type of documentation we are discussing now, should be a knowledgeable user with some fresh insights into the learning curve the novice user will face, and some empathy for that new user. Ignoring the need for documentation, putting it off until the last moment is a formula for poor quality documentation. - In my humble opinion. Have a great work week! Leslie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 5:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs Well, a difference of opinion is what makes a horse race. Iterative software methods do not require iterative documentation methods; in most cases, documentation before the last iteration is considered both wasteful and useless. While I have a great deal of respect for Steve McConnell, proposing early draft user guides as a replacement for requirement specs is a bit off the road. If you develop software, and intend to use early draft user guides instead of requirements, you are going to be greeting the folks at Wal-Mart rather than trying to pull back a contract or two from Bangalore. The statement is at odds with most developers' (and most business analysts') understanding of "requirements." Putting an occasional "agile" into a sentence doesn't make the process any more reasonable. I didn't invent the idea of ignoring documentation until the final product is ready (or almost ready) to ship. Far more intelligent, competent, and capable people than me have decided that "involving TWs from the early stages of development" is only useful when the end product is carved in stone before the first line of code is written. That, for better of worse, is rarely the case. Lastly, given that about a third of all software projects, agile or otherwise, fail so badly they are abandoned, if you ignore documentation completely, you have a one in three chance of coming out ahead when the project flops because you have at least saved the cost of documentation. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:21:17 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED], but I find the thread both:a) Off-topicb) Misleading. Iterative sofware methods require iterative documentation methods, but by no means do they eliminate the parallel need for early draft user manuals. In fact, Steve McConnell (Code Complete) proposes early draft user guides as an agile replacement for requirements specs.Ben> Because the application itself is built in an iterative process, rather than > being carved in stone, reacting to feedback from the client, documentation > before the last minute is pointless. The reason should be obvious; the > application being documented in the early stages bears little resemblance > to the application delivered. Ben Hechter Vancouver BC [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook together at last. Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/lhs_emf%40pacbell.net Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/opt
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Well, a difference of opinion is what makes a horse race. Iterative software methods do not require iterative documentation methods; in most cases, documentation before the last iteration is considered both wasteful and useless. While I have a great deal of respect for Steve McConnell, proposing early draft user guides as a replacement for requirement specs is a bit off the road. If you develop software, and intend to use early draft user guides instead of requirements, you are going to be greeting the folks at Wal-Mart rather than trying to pull back a contract or two from Bangalore. The statement is at odds with most developers' (and most business analysts') understanding of "requirements." Putting an occasional "agile" into a sentence doesn't make the process any more reasonable. I didn't invent the idea of ignoring documentation until the final product is ready (or almost ready) to ship. Far more intelligent, competent, and capable people than me have decided that "involving TWs from the early stages of development" is only useful when the end product is carved in stone before the first line of code is written. That, for better of worse, is rarely the case. Lastly, given that about a third of all software projects, agile or otherwise, fail so badly they are abandoned, if you ignore documentation completely, you have a one in three chance of coming out ahead when the project flops because you have at least saved the cost of documentation. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:21:17 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: re: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED], but I find the thread both:a) Off-topicb) Misleading. Iterative sofware methods require iterative documentation methods, but by no means do they eliminate the parallel need for early draft user manuals. In fact, Steve McConnell (Code Complete) proposes early draft user guides as an agile replacement for requirements specs.Ben> Because the application itself is built in an iterative process, rather than > being carved in stone, reacting to feedback from the client, documentation > before the last minute is pointless. The reason should be obvious; the > application being documented in the early stages bears little resemblance > to the application delivered. Ben Hechter Vancouver BC [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook – together at last. Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
re: radical revamping of techpubs
Sorry, but I find the thread both: a) Off-topic b) Misleading. Iterative sofware methods require iterative documentation methods, but by no means do they eliminate the parallel need for early draft user manuals. In fact, Steve McConnell (Code Complete) proposes early draft user guides as an agile replacement for requirements specs. Ben > Because the application itself is built in an iterative process, rather than > being carved in stone, reacting to feedback from the client, documentation > before the last minute is pointless. The reason should be obvious; the > application being documented in the early stages bears little resemblance > to the application delivered. Ben HechterVancouver [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
First to market only works until the second one to market arrives, at which point it then the market share leans toward the company who demonstrates best understanding of the market through their product coupled with the best marketing team. On 10/22/07, Pinkham, Jim wrote: > There's something to be said for a first-mover advantage, but I'm > increasingly less inclined to believe that it's "huge." For some > companies and some products, it might be worth as little as 90 days. For > many, perhaps a year. But companies that focus on widespread utility, > pay heed to excellence in customer service, and are sensitive to both > upfront price and total cost of ownership compete very well in today's > marketplace. -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager http://techcommdood.blogspot.com
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Technical Writer wrote: > but otherwise not particularly useful." To believe that a > secondary industry is necessary to assure an acceptable level > of quality in production is impoverished. Quality goods can > be produced by motivated, competent workers without a QA overseer. And later: > Yes. It is mandatory that conscientious performance of a > particular work task include--at a minimum--an acceptable > level of quality. Without the intervention of the QA > department. The Theory X management view that people are > lazy, don't care about quality, and will do everything > possible to avoid work unless micromanaged every moment is > obsolete, and indicative of little more than a failure of > management. This is a remarkably uninformed view of what quality is and what Quality Assurance does. It's been two generations since the work of Deming. Anyone who still thinks that quality is purely subjective, that all you need to assure quality is conscientious, motivated workers, and that the QA department is a bunch of "overseers" whipping workers into line, clearly needs to learn something about the subject before opining about it. I'll skip the rest of Technical Writer's posts until the poor quality of the formatting improves. Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 -- ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
There's something to be said for a first-mover advantage, but I'm increasingly less inclined to believe that it's "huge." For some companies and some products, it might be worth as little as 90 days. For many, perhaps a year. But companies that focus on widespread utility, pay heed to excellence in customer service, and are sensitive to both upfront price and total cost of ownership compete very well in today's marketplace. From: Technical Writer [mailto:tekwr...@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 6:17 PM To: Pinkham, Jim; framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) Yes. Because Sony's stategy is based on first mover advantage and the high prices innovators are willing to pay. They are much less interested in the price competion and flood of imitations that inevitably follow a successful innovation. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites > Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:25:54 -0500 > From: Jim.Pinkham at voith.com > To: tekwrytr at hotmail.com; john at hedtke.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com > > What about the business strategy of Sony? Admittedly, I see some loyalists, but I see many consumers who are inclined to wait for the price to inevitably come down when a new Sony product hits the market -- or who head for alternatives that don't involve annoyingly proprietary formats such as the Memory Stick. > > -Original Message- > From: framers-bounces+jim.pinkham=voith.com at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+jim.pinkham=voith.com at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Technical Writer > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:03 PM > To: john at hedtke.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) > > > > Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. > > The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM. > > > > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: gflato at nanometrics.com; > > tekwrytr at hotmail.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com> From: > > john at hedtke.com> Subject: First on market (was RE: radical revamping > > of techpubs)> > Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be > > the first on > the market with the latest release, I think history > > shows that it is > almost NEVER the first product to market that has > > long-term success, > at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the > > first to market by a > number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten > > there first with > anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. > > Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they > > got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better > > overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And > > so on. It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products > > that watched > what the first product did and then didn't make the > > same mistakes or > at least capitalized on marketing. There are > > exceptions to > this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly > > innovative as > to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. > > For the most > part, the first product to cross the finish line is > > guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the test of time.> > Even on a > > short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an > > > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > > > enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > > > Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their > > > computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me > > > in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job > > > SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, > > > not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and > > > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a company was actively > &
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Yes. I'm a Eudora user for the last 12 years and I tend to eschew HTML mail. At 07:10 AM 10/22/2007, Chris Borokowski wrote: From my experience, HTML-encoded email seems to screw up more than it helps. Stick to good ol 7-bit ASCII. --- John Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, no, that's not the case, Gillian; Tekwryter's emails > directly to me have been well-formatted. I think this is more an > effect of the listserve software doing something unexpected. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/john%40hedtke.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Yours truly, John Hedtke Author/Consultant/Contract Writer www.hedtke.com <-- website Region 7 Director, STC 541-685-5000 (office landline) 541-554-2189 (cell) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (primary email) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (secondary email) ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
First to market only works until the second one to market arrives, at which point it then the market share leans toward the company who demonstrates best understanding of the market through their product coupled with the best marketing team. On 10/22/07, Pinkham, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There's something to be said for a first-mover advantage, but I'm > increasingly less inclined to believe that it's "huge." For some > companies and some products, it might be worth as little as 90 days. For > many, perhaps a year. But companies that focus on widespread utility, > pay heed to excellence in customer service, and are sensitive to both > upfront price and total cost of ownership compete very well in today's > marketplace. -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager http://techcommdood.blogspot.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
>From my experience, HTML-encoded email seems to screw up more than it helps. Stick to good ol 7-bit ASCII. --- John Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, no, that's not the case, Gillian; Tekwryter's emails > directly to me have been well-formatted. I think this is more an > effect of the listserve software doing something unexpected. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
There's something to be said for a first-mover advantage, but I'm increasingly less inclined to believe that it's "huge." For some companies and some products, it might be worth as little as 90 days. For many, perhaps a year. But companies that focus on widespread utility, pay heed to excellence in customer service, and are sensitive to both upfront price and total cost of ownership compete very well in today's marketplace. From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 6:17 PM To: Pinkham, Jim; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) Yes. Because Sony's stategy is based on first mover advantage and the high prices innovators are willing to pay. They are much less interested in the price competion and flood of imitations that inevitably follow a successful innovation. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of: Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites > Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:25:54 -0500 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com > > What about the business strategy of Sony? Admittedly, I see some loyalists, but I see many consumers who are inclined to wait for the price to inevitably come down when a new Sony product hits the market -- or who head for alternatives that don't involve annoyingly proprietary formats such as the Memory Stick. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:03 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com > Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) > > > > Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. > > The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM. > > > > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> From: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: First on market (was RE: radical revamping > > of techpubs)> > Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be > > the first on > the market with the latest release, I think history > > shows that it is > almost NEVER the first product to market that has > > long-term success, > at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the > > first to market by a > number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten > > there first with > anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. > > Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they > > got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better > > overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And > > so on. It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products > > that watched > what the first product did and then didn't make the > > same mistakes or > at least capitalized on marketing. There are > > exceptions to > this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly > > innovative as > to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. > > For the most > part, the first product to cross the finish line is > > guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the test of time.> > Even on a > > short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an > > > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > > > enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > > > Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their > > > computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me > > > in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job > > > SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, > > > not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and > > > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a company was actively > > taking a few extra months to > plan things and deliver me a bug-free > > product, I'd be very impressed > and would consider that heavily when > > shopping f
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Got to chime in on this interesting discussion. Technical Writer wrote: In a world in which dynamic online help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. I see your point, but I think this is polarizing a non-issue. I don't think "high-volume production of acceptable quality content" and "details of grammar, construction, or voice" are incompatible goals. If I am hiring a technical writer, I want someone who can pay attention to both. In rapid development environments (whatever you care to call that model), there are plenty of tools to help automate your high-volume production. It doesn't take longer to write clearly and consistently. And I don't think you can safely say "the majority of users" don't care. Depends on the users. Depends on the product. Personally, I can blink at a few errors but when they become egregious, I think "Jeez Louise, they can't even run a spell-checker? What other details can't this company be bothered with?" The "dynamic online help files" are part of the product, and I start to question quality control for the whole product. Thanks for the thoughtful discussion, everyone. Dorianne -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:37 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective opinions of the minority. < From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, > > Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. > > I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until the board of Directors wisely fired him and put a new CEO at the helm.> > > -Gillian> > _ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dorianne.gutierrez%40polarislibrary.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote > Actually, no, that's not the case, Gillian; Tekwryter's emails > directly to me have been well-formatted. I think this is more an > effect of the listserve software doing something unexpected. Actually, it's a product of Microsoft's latest Windows Live e-mail client for hotmail subscribers. Replies that go directly to an individual are sent in HTML format and appear properly. But replies that are sent to the list are sent as plain text minus all the automatically inserted line breaks so that they appear as one big, unreadable block of text filled with angle brackets to indicate where new lines are supposed to start. It took me a few tries to work out a process that reproduces the original message properly, and it takes me a couple of extra minutes to do manual formatting that the brain-dead e-mail client should do automatically. Really annoying. But it is true that Tekwryter doesn't bother to work around the Windows Live shortcomings... Fred Ridder _ Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star power. http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
"Branding" also refers to "We are your friends and neighbors. You should pay me twice as much as Wal-Mart because we went to the same high school." The term is used to refer to an association between idea and product. Coke is a good example, as are crescent wrench, visegrips, and a dozen others--an automatic association between the concept and the brand. The point is that customer service is not worth paying extra. It is nice if you can get it at the same price, but people seem more inclined to look at price first, then quality, then customer service. The latter two are nice to have, but not at the expense of the first. Yes, there are exceptions. No, they don't change the basic scenario at all. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:55:25 -0700> To: tekwrytr at hotmail.com> From: john at hedtke.com> Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> > At 03:50 PM 10/19/2007, you wrote:> >Sony made buckets of money on beta. Their strategy is heavily > >weighted to the first mover advantage. THey are not particularly > >interested in the nickle and diming of the followers.> > That they did. The problem as I see it is that it was the cost of > their licensing agreements that led to the displacement of a higher > quality product (Beta) with the > poorer-but-more-accessible-and-affordable product, VHS.> > >Wal-Mart reference was that small businesses adjacent to Wal-Mart > >cannot survive on customer-centric service, high quality, and > >branding, not that Wal-Mart offered such.> > I'm not sure I quite understand this one. I would've thought that > these would be the only tools they'd have to compete with (well, > maybe not branding--the Wal-Mart brand's right up there with Coke for > recognizability) since they cannot compete for price. Would you > elaborate, please? > _ Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf?. Stop by today. http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Yes. Because Sony's stategy is based on first mover advantage and the high prices innovators are willing to pay. They are much less interested in the price competion and flood of imitations that inevitably follow a successful innovation.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:25:54 -0500> From: Jim.Pinkham at voith.com> To: tekwrytr at hotmail.com; john at hedtke.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com> > What about the business strategy of Sony? Admittedly, I see some loyalists, but I see many consumers who are inclined to wait for the price to inevitably come down when a new Sony product hits the market -- or who head for alternatives that don't involve annoyingly proprietary formats such as the Memory Stick.> > -Original Message-> From: framers-bounces+jim.pinkham=voith.com at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+jim.pinkham=voith.com at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Technical Writer> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:03 PM> To: john at hedtke.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> > > > Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. > > The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM.> > > > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: gflato at nanometrics.com; > > tekwrytr at hotmail.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com> From: > > john at hedtke.com> Subject: First on market (was RE: radical revamping > > of techpubs)> > Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be > > the first on > the market with the latest release, I think history > > shows that it is > almost NEVER the first product to market that has > > long-term success, > at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the > > first to market by a > number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten > > there first with > anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. > > Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they > > got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better > > overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And > > so on. It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products > > that watched > what the first product did and then didn't make the > > same mistakes or > at least capitalized on marketing. There are > > exceptions to > this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly > > innovative as > to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. > > For the most > part, the first product to cross the finish line is > > guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the test of time.> > Even on a > > short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an > > > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > > > enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > > > Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their > > > computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me > > > in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job > > > SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, > > > not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and > > > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a company was actively > > taking a few extra months to > plan things and deliver me a bug-free > > product, I'd be very impressed > and would consider that heavily when > > shopping for something.> > > Yours truly,> > John Hedtke> > > Author/Consultant/Contract Writer> www.hedtke.com <-- website> > > 541-685-5000 (office landline)> 541-554-2189 (cell)> john at hedtke.com > > (primary email)> johnhedtke at aol.com (secondary email) >> _> Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook - together at last. Get it now.> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___
RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
"Branding" also refers to "We are your friends and neighbors. You should pay me twice as much as Wal-Mart because we went to the same high school." The term is used to refer to an association between idea and product. Coke is a good example, as are crescent wrench, visegrips, and a dozen others--an automatic association between the concept and the brand. The point is that customer service is not worth paying extra. It is nice if you can get it at the same price, but people seem more inclined to look at price first, then quality, then customer service. The latter two are nice to have, but not at the expense of the first. Yes, there are exceptions. No, they don't change the basic scenario at all. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:55:25 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> > At 03:50 PM 10/19/2007, you wrote:> >Sony made buckets of money on beta. Their strategy is heavily > >weighted to the first mover advantage. THey are not particularly > >interested in the nickle and diming of the followers.> > That they did. The problem as I see it is that it was the cost of > their licensing agreements that led to the displacement of a higher > quality product (Beta) with the > poorer-but-more-accessible-and-affordable product, VHS.> > >Wal-Mart reference was that small businesses adjacent to Wal-Mart > >cannot survive on customer-centric service, high quality, and > >branding, not that Wal-Mart offered such.> > I'm not sure I quite understand this one. I would've thought that > these would be the only tools they'd have to compete with (well, > maybe not branding--the Wal-Mart brand's right up there with Coke for > recognizability) since they cannot compete for price. Would you > elaborate, please? > _ Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today. http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Yes. Because Sony's stategy is based on first mover advantage and the high prices innovators are willing to pay. They are much less interested in the price competion and flood of imitations that inevitably follow a successful innovation.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:25:54 -0500> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > What about the business strategy of Sony? Admittedly, I see some loyalists, but I see many consumers who are inclined to wait for the price to inevitably come down when a new Sony product hits the market -- or who head for alternatives that don't involve annoyingly proprietary formats such as the Memory Stick.> > -Original Message-> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:03 PM> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> > > > Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. > > The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM.> > > > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> From: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: First on market (was RE: radical revamping > > of techpubs)> > Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be > > the first on > the market with the latest release, I think history > > shows that it is > almost NEVER the first product to market that has > > long-term success, > at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the > > first to market by a > number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten > > there first with > anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. > > Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they > > got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better > > overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And > > so on. It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products > > that watched > what the first product did and then didn't make the > > same mistakes or > at least capitalized on marketing. There are > > exceptions to > this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly > > innovative as > to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. > > For the most > part, the first product to cross the finish line is > > guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the test of time.> > Even on a > > short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an > > > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > > > enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > > > Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their > > > computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me > > > in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job > > > SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, > > > not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and > > > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a company was actively > > taking a few extra months to > plan things and deliver me a bug-free > > product, I'd be very impressed > and would consider that heavily when > > shopping for something.> > > Yours truly,> > John Hedtke> > > Author/Consultant/Contract Writer> www.hedtke.com <-- website> > > 541-685-5000 (office landline)> 541-554-2189 (cell)> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > (primary email)> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (secondary email) >> _> Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook - together at last. Get it now.> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___> > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Send list messages to
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
There is a difference between being "first to invent" and "first to successfully produce and/or market." The world is full of brilliant ideas that never go (and never went) anywhere. Xerox is PARC, not Park. What they developed was the concept of GUI, based on user interaction with a computer. The opposing view, that apps should be dumbed-down to the LCD, won out. A pity. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:31:36 -0400To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gates, first to market? Gates has proven anything by innovative. He's the quintessential, 'let the other guys put it on the market and we'll steal it and market it better.' DOS? He bought the company? Windows? Stole the idea from Apple (who stole it from Xerox Park) Internet Explorer? Netscape was their first. The Zune? Don't make me laugh. Gates has been watching and copying for as long as I remember. Ron Ron Miller Freelance Technology Writing Since 1988 Contributing Editor, EContent Magazine email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://byronmiller.typepad.com web: http://www.ronsmiller.com Winner of the 2006 and 2007 Apex Award for Publication Excellence/Feature Writing On Oct 19, 2007, at 12:37 PM, Technical Writer wrote: And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective opinions of the minority. < From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, > > Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. > > I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until the board of Directors wisely fired him and put a new CEO at the helm.> > > -Gillian> > _ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/ronsmiller%40comcast.net Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. _ Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star power. http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
At 04:09 PM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote: That's what makes marketing such a popular major. :) Truly! ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
That's what makes marketing such a popular major. http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:23:07 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubsTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com The market is also driven by price, availability, and value (=quality for the price), but pervasive marketing and cut-throat competition can trump. ReneJohn Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even more by good marketing.At 10:58 AM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote:>And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality >would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, >the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be >working rather than having this >discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, >Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online >Content - Enterprise Websites>>>Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 >10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >framers@lists.frameusers.com>>>>I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is >not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs >reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap.>>>Thank you,>>>Gillian Flato>Technical Writer (Software)>nanometrics>1550 Buckeye Dr.>Milpitas, CA. 95035>(408.545.6316>7 408.232.5911>* [EMAIL PROTECTED]>>>>>From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, >October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs>The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a >host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software >applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective.>>>Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 >10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >framers@lists.frameusers.com>>> >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;> >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, > not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases.>>When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech >instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality >is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand >cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of >running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, >quality is crap, that's not subjective.>>TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these >types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I >am taking about.>>BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious >yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are.>>>Thank you,>>>Gillian Flato>Technical Writer (Software)>nanometrics>1550 Buckeye Dr.>Milpitas, CA. 95035>(408.545.6316>7 408.232.5911>* [EMAIL PROTECTED]>>>>>From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, >October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the > wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is > primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population > of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of > Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, > whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an > objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian > flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" > by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe > that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a > warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company > that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a > reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting > software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a > slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the > realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain > the production of technical documentation. In a world in which > dynamic onlne help
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Actually, no, that's not the case, Gillian; Tekwryter's emails directly to me have been well-formatted. I think this is more an effect of the listserve software doing something unexpected. John At 04:04 PM 10/19/2007, Flato, Gillian wrote: One of the aspects of good Tech Writing is usability and formatting of text to make it easy to read for the end-user. Tekwryter can't even make an email readable, as you can see by his response below. I won't hold my breath that his documents are good quality. I guess the email below is a product of an Agile/XP email system. He also might consider getting someone to QA his email posts. -Gillian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 3:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs Good point.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:10:43 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It > is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even > more by good marketing.> > At 10:58 AM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote:> > >And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality > >would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, > >the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be > >working rather than having this > >discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, > >Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online > >Content - Enterprise Websites> >> >> >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 > >10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >framers@lists.frameusers.com> >> >> >> >I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is > >not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs > >reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap.> >> >> >Thank you,> >> >> >Gillian Flato> >Technical Writer (Software)> >nanometrics> >1550 Buckeye Dr.> >Milpitas, CA. 95035> >(408.545.6316> >7 408.232.5911> >* [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >> >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, > >October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> >The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a > >host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software > >applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective.> >> >> >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 > >10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >framers@lists.frameusers.com> >> >> > >>Qual ity is primarily a subjective opinion;> > >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, > > not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases.> >> >When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech > >instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality > >is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand > >cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of > >running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, > >quality is crap, that's not subjective.> >> >TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these > >types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I > >am taking about.> >> >BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious > >yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are.> >> >> >Thank you,> >> >> >Gillian Flato> >Technical Writer (Software)> >nanometrics> >1550 Buckeye Dr.> >Milpitas, CA. 95035> >(408.545.6316> >7 408.232.5911> >* [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >> >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, > >October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the > > wannabes
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
One of the aspects of good Tech Writing is usability and formatting of text to make it easy to read for the end-user. Tekwryter can't even make an email readable, as you can see by his response below. I won't hold my breath that his documents are good quality. I guess the email below is a product of an Agile/XP email system. He also might consider getting someone to QA his email posts. -Gillian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 3:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs Good point.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:10:43 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It > is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even > more by good marketing.> > At 10:58 AM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote:> > >And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality > >would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, > >the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be > >working rather than having this > >discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, > >Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online > >Content - Enterprise Websites> >> >> >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 > >10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >framers@lists.frameusers.com> >> >> >> >I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is > >not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs > >reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap.> >> >> >Thank you,> >> >> >Gillian Flato> >Technical Writer (Software)> >nanometrics> >1550 Buckeye Dr.> >Milpitas, CA. 95035> >(408.545.6316> >7 408.232.5911> >* [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >> >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, > >October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> >The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a > >host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software > >applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective.> >> >> >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 > >10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >framers@lists.frameusers.com> >> >> > >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;> > >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, > > not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases.> >> >When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech > >instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality > >is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand > >cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of > >running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, > >quality is crap, that's not subjective.> >> >TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these > >types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I > >am taking about.> >> >BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious > >yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are.> >> >> >Thank you,> >> >> >Gillian Flato> >Technical Writer (Software)> >nanometrics> >1550 Buckeye Dr.> >Milpitas, CA. 95035> >(408.545.6316> >7 408.232.5911> >* [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >> >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, > >October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the > > wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is > > primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population > > of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of > > Death, or necessary re-booting orre-insta
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Good point.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:10:43 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It > is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even > more by good marketing.> > At 10:58 AM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote:> > >And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality > >would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, > >the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be > >working rather than having this > >discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, > >Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online > >Content - Enterprise Websites> >> >> >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 > >10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >framers@lists.frameusers.com> >> >> >> >I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is > >not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs > >reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap.> >> >> >Thank you,> >> >> >Gillian Flato> >Technical Writer (Software)> >nanometrics> >1550 Buckeye Dr.> >Milpitas, CA. 95035> >(408.545.6316> >7 408.232.5911> >* [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >> >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, > >October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> >The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a > >host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software > >applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective.> >> >> >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 > >10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >framers@lists.frameusers.com> >> >> > >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;> > >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, > > not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases.> >> >When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech > >instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality > >is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand > >cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of > >running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, > >quality is crap, that's not subjective.> >> >TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these > >types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I > >am taking about.> >> >BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious > >yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are.> >> >> >Thank you,> >> >> >Gillian Flato> >Technical Writer (Software)> >nanometrics> >1550 Buckeye Dr.> >Milpitas, CA. 95035> >(408.545.6316> >7 408.232.5911> >* [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >> >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, > >October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> > And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the > > wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is > > primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population > > of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of > > Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, > > whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an > > objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian > > flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" > > by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe > > that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a > > warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company > > that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a > > reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting > > s
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Yes. It is mandatory that conscientious performance of a particular work task include--at a minimum--an acceptable level of quality. Without the intervention of the QA department. The Theory X management view that people are lazy, don't care about quality, and will do everything possible to avoid work unless micromanaged every moment is obsolete, and indicative of little more than a failure of management.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:09:08 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > Got to chime in on this interesting discussion.> > Technical Writer wrote:> > In a world in which dynamic online help files are rapidly replacing hard> copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set> that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content,> rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar,> construction, or voice.> > I see your point, but I think this is polarizing a non-issue. I don't> think "high-volume production of acceptable quality content" and> "details of grammar, construction, or voice" are incompatible goals. If> I am hiring a technical writer, I want someone who can pay attention to> both. In rapid development environments (whatever you care to call that> model), there are plenty of tools to help automate your high-volume> production. It doesn't take longer to write clearly and consistently.> And I don't think you can safely say "the majority of users" don't care.> Depends on the users. Depends on the product. Personally, I can blink at> a few errors but when they become egregious, I think "Jeez Louise, they> can't even run a spell-checker? What other details can't this company be> bothered with?" The "dynamic online help files" are part of the product,> and I start to question quality control for the whole product.> > Thanks for the thoughtful discussion, everyone.> > Dorianne> _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook – together at last. Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Exactly. And the desire to buy--the want and the need--are in the province of marketing. That is why the makers of some of the shoddiest goods on the planet prattle on about quality, as if it were a thing-in-itself. In many cases, it is a subjective perception and subjective opinion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:06:06 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > People buy things out of need and want. If the quality sucks, and they> need it, what are they going to do? If an insulin pump eats batteries> at a 20% higher rate than advertised, the quality sucks, but that> doesn't mean that the product isn't needed. It's up to the company to> fix the quality flaws and bring the product up to market expectation.> > No product is ever perfect. That's near impossible to do. But darn> close is attainable.> > And quality is very much objective in most products given that you can> collect quality metrics on the products themselves, log bugs, measure> impact, etc.> > On 10/19/07, Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> > And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be working rather than having this discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> > -- > Bill Swallow> HATT List Owner> WWP-Users List Owner> Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter> STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager> http://techcommdood.blogspot.com _ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
As there is an entire industry based on usability. Also the first to go when the belt needs tightening, because they are perceived as being "nice to have when the economy is good, but otherwise not particularly useful." To believe that a secondary industry is necessary to assure an acceptable level of quality in production is impoverished. Quality goods can be produced by motivated, competent workers without a QA overseer. > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:03:01 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL > PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs> CC: [EMAIL > PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > I can't see how quality can > possibly be subjective if there's an> entire occupation devoted to assuring > it. Perhaps TW has only worked> in environments where "quality" is merely a > buzzword.> > On 10/19/07, Flato, Gillian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > I have > seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is not> > subjective. > If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs reported> > by customers > and QA people, the software application is crap.> > -- > Bill Swallow> HATT > List Owner> WWP-Users List Owner> Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter> STC > Single-Sourcing SIG Manager> http://techcommdood.blogspot.com _ Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today. http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
What about the business strategy of Sony? Admittedly, I see some loyalists, but I see many consumers who are inclined to wait for the price to inevitably come down when a new Sony product hits the market -- or who head for alternatives that don't involve annoyingly proprietary formats such as the Memory Stick. -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+jim.pinkham=voith.com at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+jim.pinkham=voith@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Technical Writer Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:03 PM To: john at hedtke.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM. > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: gflato at nanometrics.com; > tekwrytr at hotmail.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com> From: > john at hedtke.com> Subject: First on market (was RE: radical revamping > of techpubs)> > Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be > the first on > the market with the latest release, I think history > shows that it is > almost NEVER the first product to market that has > long-term success, > at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the > first to market by a > number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten > there first with > anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. > Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they > got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better > overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And > so on. It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products > that watched > what the first product did and then didn't make the > same mistakes or > at least capitalized on marketing. There are > exceptions to > this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly > innovative as > to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. > For the most > part, the first product to cross the finish line is > guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the test of time.> > Even on a > short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an > > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > > enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > > Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their > > computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me > > in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job > > SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, > > not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and > > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a company was actively > taking a few extra months to > plan things and deliver me a bug-free > product, I'd be very impressed > and would consider that heavily when > shopping for something.> > > Yours truly,> > John Hedtke> > Author/Consultant/Contract Writer> www.hedtke.com <-- website> > 541-685-5000 (office landline)> 541-554-2189 (cell)> john at hedtke.com > (primary email)> johnhedtke at aol.com (secondary email) > _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook - together at last. ?Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as jim.pinkham at voith.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/jim.pinkham%40voith.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Ron Miller wrote: > In my view, the only reason Windows has dominated personal > computing is because Microsoft bullied hardware company into > selling its products. I don't think this popular myth stands up to scrutiny. Microsoft's "bullying" wasn't primarily to get people to *use* Windows, it was to get them to *pay* for it. In the absence of bundling the OS with a new PC, vast numbers of people would have told the salesman, "I don't need an OS," and borrowed a friend's Windows disks/CD. The pressure to unbundle led MS to develop the current "activation" mechanism as a substitute defense against widespread piracy. Windows became dominant for two reasons, IMHO: (1) Microsoft didn't try to force people into overpriced proprietary hardware, like Apple did. (2) From Win 3.1 on, the average non-geek joe could install the OS (if necessary), install a new application, add a peripheral, etc., and be successful 90+% of the time by just following some simple instructions or a wizard. No having to make tedious edits to arcane commands in a bunch of barely documented scripts and config files. No struggling to resolve dependency problems and version conflicts. No scouring geek hangouts for the right hacked source code to make your CD drive work. Stuff just worked -- not always or perfectly, but often enough and well enough to satisfy the vast majority. A friend of mine who's an Oracle application programmer, and who's been running Linux at home exclusively for many years, recently got a new PC (sans OS). He spent a long weekend and then some installing Linux and getting everything configured and working -- and that was Ubuntu, which is supposed to be a very "friendly" Linux distro. Bash Microsoft all you like (and there surely is plenty to criticize, especially regarding security), but the Windows PC user experience is miles ahead of everything except the Mac -- which it beats on price and availability of software and peripherals. Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 -- ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM. > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: gflato at nanometrics.com; > tekwrytr at hotmail.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com> From: john at > hedtke.com> Subject: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> > > Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be the first on > the > market with the latest release, I think history shows that it is > almost > NEVER the first product to market that has long-term success, > at least in > high-tech. The IBM PC was not the first to market by a > number of years. > Microsoft hasn't ever gotten there first with > anything that comes to mind. > VisiCalc. WordStar. Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before > Robohelp, yet they got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and > is, a better overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more > Beta. And so on. It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products > that watched > what the first product did and then didn't make the same > mistakes or > at least capitalized on marketing. There are exceptions to > > this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly innovative as > to be > unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. For the most > part, the > first product to cross the finish line is guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the > test of time.> > Even on a short-term basis, pushing a product out the door > to meet an > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > > enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > Adobe? > And who, having done that, got away with it with their > computing skin > intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me > in his column a couple > months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job > SP1," but this is an aphorism you > could apply to a lot of companies, > not just the folks in Redmond. They all > feel the same pressures and > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a > company was actively taking a few extra months to > plan things and deliver > me a bug-free product, I'd be very impressed > and would consider that > heavily when shopping for something.> > > Yours truly,> > John Hedtke> > Author/Consultant/Contract Writer> www.hedtke.com <-- website> 541-685-5000 > (office landline)> 541-554-2189 (cell)> john at hedtke.com (primary email)> > johnhedtke at aol.com (secondary email) > _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook ? together at last. ?Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
My inference is that hardware would not have been standardized without Microsoft or some other aggressive, unifying business entity. I've actually had good luck with PCs, but I've been a Mac user since 1984 and an Apple user for four years before that, a UNIX user about the same length of time, and have built my own machines for close to fifteen years now. Buy Intel motherboards :) and try again. --- Ron Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Your inference suggests that hardware would have stayed expensive > without Microsoft. I don't buy that. In my view, hardware would have > dropped regardless because the price of the components dropped over > time, completely independent from the PC's relationship to Microsoft. > > In fact, I would maintain that competition in the OS/Office > productivity space in the 90s would have eventually resulted in > making these items commodities, which would have reduced the overall > cost of ownership dramatically. Proof of this is the number of free > office productivity and operating systems that have developed in > today's more open environment. These products would have developed > sooner had Microsoft not been allowed to artificially control pricing > and the market. > > I would agree that there it would have created a more difficult > environment for us as tech writer to produce documentation, but I > have the feeling it would have worked itself out, just as it has with > browser-based help that works regardless of the operating system in > place. As for Apple, people continue to buy the product in spite of > its higher price because it isn't a one for one comparison. There is > a quality factor, ease of use and stability that I've yet to see > matched in a PC. And I speak as someone who is relatively recent Mac > owner, but has used PCs since 1985 > > Ron > > Ron Miller > Freelance Technology Writing Since 1988 > Contributing Editor, EContent Magazine > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > blog: http://byronmiller.typepad.com > web: http://www.ronsmiller.com > > Winner of the 2006 and 2007 Apex Award for Publication Excellence/ > Feature Writing > > > > On Oct 19, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Chris Borokowski wrote: > > > I'm somewhat thankful they did, as the result was a standardization > of > > hardware that allows $500 to buy a better quality machine than a > $1500 > > Macintosh or $2500 custom UNIX. Sometimes aggression in business > can > > produce very fortunate results for us little people. > > > > --- Ron Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> In my view, the only reason Windows has dominated personal > computing > >> is because Microsoft bullied hardware company into selling its > >> products. It told computer manufacturers throughout the 90s when > it > >> built its domination to either use only Windows or to have to pay > >> more for each copy if they didn't. > > > > http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ > > technical writing | consulting | development > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > ___ > > > > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/ > > ronsmiller%40comcast.net > > > > Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit > > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. > > http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
What about the business strategy of Sony? Admittedly, I see some loyalists, but I see many consumers who are inclined to wait for the price to inevitably come down when a new Sony product hits the market -- or who head for alternatives that don't involve annoyingly proprietary formats such as the Memory Stick. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs) Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM. > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> From: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: First on market (was RE: radical revamping > of techpubs)> > Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be > the first on > the market with the latest release, I think history > shows that it is > almost NEVER the first product to market that has > long-term success, > at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the > first to market by a > number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten > there first with > anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. > Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they > got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better > overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And > so on. It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products > that watched > what the first product did and then didn't make the > same mistakes or > at least capitalized on marketing. There are > exceptions to > this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly > innovative as > to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. > For the most > part, the first product to cross the finish line is > guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the test of time.> > Even on a > short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an > > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > > enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > > Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their > > computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me > > in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job > > SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, > > not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and > > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a company was actively > taking a few extra months to > plan things and deliver me a bug-free > product, I'd be very impressed > and would consider that heavily when > shopping for something.> > > Yours truly,> > John Hedtke> > Author/Consultant/Contract Writer> www.hedtke.com <-- website> > 541-685-5000 (office landline)> 541-554-2189 (cell)> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (primary email)> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (secondary email) > _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook - together at last. Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/jim.pinkham%40voith.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
Your inference suggests that hardware would have stayed expensive without Microsoft. I don't buy that. In my view, hardware would have dropped regardless because the price of the components dropped over time, completely independent from the PC's relationship to Microsoft. In fact, I would maintain that competition in the OS/Office productivity space in the 90s would have eventually resulted in making these items commodities, which would have reduced the overall cost of ownership dramatically. Proof of this is the number of free office productivity and operating systems that have developed in today's more open environment. These products would have developed sooner had Microsoft not been allowed to artificially control pricing and the market. I would agree that there it would have created a more difficult environment for us as tech writer to produce documentation, but I have the feeling it would have worked itself out, just as it has with browser-based help that works regardless of the operating system in place. As for Apple, people continue to buy the product in spite of its higher price because it isn't a one for one comparison. There is a quality factor, ease of use and stability that I've yet to see matched in a PC. And I speak as someone who is relatively recent Mac owner, but has used PCs since 1985 Ron Ron Miller Freelance Technology Writing Since 1988 Contributing Editor, EContent Magazine email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://byronmiller.typepad.com web: http://www.ronsmiller.com Winner of the 2006 and 2007 Apex Award for Publication Excellence/ Feature Writing On Oct 19, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Chris Borokowski wrote: I'm somewhat thankful they did, as the result was a standardization of hardware that allows $500 to buy a better quality machine than a $1500 Macintosh or $2500 custom UNIX. Sometimes aggression in business can produce very fortunate results for us little people. --- Ron Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In my view, the only reason Windows has dominated personal computing is because Microsoft bullied hardware company into selling its products. It told computer manufacturers throughout the 90s when it built its domination to either use only Windows or to have to pay more for each copy if they didn't. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/ ronsmiller%40comcast.net Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Technical Writer wrote: > Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the > first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business > strategy of Sony. Sony is a good company with solid products, but their track record on innovations sucks. They brought us, among others, Beta videocassettes, MD (MiniDisc) cartridges, and Memory Sticks. I'm not the only person who saw that Sony was behind the Blu Ray format and consequently decided to bet on HD DVD. :-) Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 --
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Au contraire, I think that's a very good way to put it, Chris. John At 11:37 AM 10/19/2007, Chris Borokowski wrote: Another way to say this might, the market is driven by perceived quality of product as a product. Microsoft Windows is not as stable as BSD, but it installs easily and lets the average user get up and running quickly while maintaining high backward compatibility. Is that higher quality, or lower quality? Not so clear. However, for the task at hand, defined by the purchasing audience, it is a more apt fit. I believe that the market is driven by image, including the marketing you mention, but part of that is a perception of quality as defined by the needs of the users. I'm sure that did nothing to simplify this debate. Feel free to flame me off-list for such blatant non-helpfulness. --- John Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It > is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even > more by good marketing. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/john%40hedtke.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Yours truly, John Hedtke Author/Consultant/Contract Writer www.hedtke.com <-- website 541-685-5000 (office landline) 541-554-2189 (cell) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (primary email) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (secondary email) ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
I'm somewhat thankful they did, as the result was a standardization of hardware that allows $500 to buy a better quality machine than a $1500 Macintosh or $2500 custom UNIX. Sometimes aggression in business can produce very fortunate results for us little people. --- Ron Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In my view, the only reason Windows has dominated personal computing > is because Microsoft bullied hardware company into selling its > products. It told computer manufacturers throughout the 90s when it > built its domination to either use only Windows or to have to pay > more for each copy if they didn't. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
No, I've known that for quite some time. It is built on BSD, hacked with Mach on a ton of libraries, and it's nowhere near as stable as BSD or as logically consistent. My primary reason for avoiding Apple is the company and, I almost forgot, the sanctimonious attitudes of its users ;) --- Neil Tubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Clearly Chris hasn't used a Mac since System 7...;-)...might be > interested to know that OSX is built on BSD! http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
In my view, the only reason Windows has dominated personal computing is because Microsoft bullied hardware company into selling its products. It told computer manufacturers throughout the 90s when it built its domination to either use only Windows or to have to pay more for each copy if they didn't. With small margins on PCs, hardware companies were forced to comply until a lawsuit put a stop to this practice. By that time, however, Windows had built a huge installed base, making it very difficult to move an entrenched player (even when the player became entrenched through less than honest means). Therefore Microsoft's dominance had little to do with having a better image or even better marketing, it had to do with a business plan to bully the market into buying its products. It worked, but Windows dominance in the OS arena has little do with its quality and even less to do with its ease of use. Ron Ron Miller Freelance Technology Writing Since 1988 Contributing Editor, EContent Magazine email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://byronmiller.typepad.com web: http://www.ronsmiller.com Winner of the 2006 and 2007 Apex Award for Publication Excellence/ Feature Writing On Oct 19, 2007, at 2:37 PM, Chris Borokowski wrote: Another way to say this might, the market is driven by perceived quality of product as a product. Microsoft Windows is not as stable as BSD, but it installs easily and lets the average user get up and running quickly while maintaining high backward compatibility. Is that higher quality, or lower quality? Not so clear. However, for the task at hand, defined by the purchasing audience, it is a more apt fit. I believe that the market is driven by image, including the marketing you mention, but part of that is a perception of quality as defined by the needs of the users. I'm sure that did nothing to simplify this debate. Feel free to flame me off-list for such blatant non-helpfulness. --- John Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even more by good marketing. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/ ronsmiller%40comcast.net Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Most applications hover somewhere between excellent and crap. The ones that generate the mile-long grievances are crap, and the ones that people treasure (and hoard on their thumb drives) for a decade are excellent. --- "Flato, Gillian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is not > subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs > reported > by customers and QA people, the software application is crap. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Doesn't it depend on what the competition is? --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And yet people still buy it. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Another way to say this might, the market is driven by perceived quality of product as a product. Microsoft Windows is not as stable as BSD, but it installs easily and lets the average user get up and running quickly while maintaining high backward compatibility. Is that higher quality, or lower quality? Not so clear. However, for the task at hand, defined by the purchasing audience, it is a more apt fit. I believe that the market is driven by image, including the marketing you mention, but part of that is a perception of quality as defined by the needs of the users. I'm sure that did nothing to simplify this debate. Feel free to flame me off-list for such blatant non-helpfulness. --- John Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It > is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even > more by good marketing. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
Bill Gates, first to market? Gates has proven anything by innovative. He's the quintessential, 'let the other guys put it on the market and we'll steal it and market it better.' DOS? He bought the company? Windows? Stole the idea from Apple (who stole it from Xerox Park) Internet Explorer? Netscape was their first. The Zune? Don't make me laugh. Gates has been watching and copying for as long as I remember. Ron Ron Miller Freelance Technology Writing Since 1988 Contributing Editor, EContent Magazine email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://byronmiller.typepad.com web: http://www.ronsmiller.com Winner of the 2006 and 2007 Apex Award for Publication Excellence/ Feature Writing On Oct 19, 2007, at 12:37 PM, Technical Writer wrote: And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective opinions of the minority. < From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, > > Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. > > I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until the board of Directors wisely fired him and put a new CEO at the helm.> > > -Gillian> > _ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx? s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/ ronsmiller%40comcast.net Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
True enough. :) At 11:23 AM 10/19/2007, Rene Stephenson wrote: The market is also driven by price, availability, and value (=quality for the price), but pervasive marketing and cut-throat competition can trump. Rene John Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even more by good marketing. At 10:58 AM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote: >And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality >would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, >the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be >working rather than having this >discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, >Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online >Content - Enterprise Websites > > >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 >10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >framers@lists.frameusers.com > > > >I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is >not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs >reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap. > > >Thank you, > > >Gillian Flato >Technical Writer (Software) >nanometrics >1550 Buckeye Dr. >Milpitas, CA. 95035 >(408.545.6316 >7 408.232.5911 >* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, >October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs >The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a >host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software >applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective. > > >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 >10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >framers@lists.frameusers.com > > > >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; > >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, > not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. > >When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech >instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality >is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand >cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of >running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, >quality is crap, that's not subjective. > >TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these >types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I >am taking about. > >BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious >yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are. > > >Thank you, > > >Gillian Flato >Technical Writer (Software) >nanometrics >1550 Buckeye Dr. >Milpitas, CA. 95035 >(408.545.6316 >7 408.232.5911 >* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, >October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs > And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the > wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is > primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population > of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of > Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, > whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an > objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian > flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" > by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe > that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a > warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company > that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a > reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting > software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a > slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the > realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain > the production of technical documentation. In a world in which > dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, > it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that > enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, > rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of > grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie t
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
The market is also driven by price, availability, and value (=quality for the price), but pervasive marketing and cut-throat competition can trump. Rene John Hedtke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even more by good marketing. At 10:58 AM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote: >And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality >would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, >the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be >working rather than having this >discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, >Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online >Content - Enterprise Websites > > >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 >10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >framers@lists.frameusers.com > > > >I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is >not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs >reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap. > > >Thank you, > > >Gillian Flato >Technical Writer (Software) >nanometrics >1550 Buckeye Dr. >Milpitas, CA. 95035 >(408.545.6316 >7 408.232.5911 >* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, >October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs >The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a >host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software >applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective. > > >Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 >10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >framers@lists.frameusers.com > > > >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; > >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, > not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. > >When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech >instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality >is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand >cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of >running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, >quality is crap, that's not subjective. > >TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these >types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I >am taking about. > >BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious >yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are. > > >Thank you, > > >Gillian Flato >Technical Writer (Software) >nanometrics >1550 Buckeye Dr. >Milpitas, CA. 95035 >(408.545.6316 >7 408.232.5911 >* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, >October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs > And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the > wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is > primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population > of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of > Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, > whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an > objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian > flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" > by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe > that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a > warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company > that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a > reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting > software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a > slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the > realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain > the production of technical documentation. In a world in which > dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, > it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that > enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, > rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of > grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the >
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
You're making an assumption that the market is driven by quality. It is not, though that's certainly a factor. The market is driven even more by good marketing. At 10:58 AM 10/19/2007, Technical Writer wrote: And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be working rather than having this discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap. Thank you, Gillian Flato Technical Writer (Software) nanometrics 1550 Buckeye Dr. Milpitas, CA. 95035 (408.545.6316 7 408.232.5911 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective. Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, quality is crap, that's not subjective. TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I am taking about. BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are. Thank you, Gillian Flato Technical Writer (Software) nanometrics 1550 Buckeye Dr. Milpitas, CA. 95035 (408.545.6316 7 408.232.5911 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective opinions of the minority.< From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, > > Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. > > I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
People buy things out of need and want. If the quality sucks, and they need it, what are they going to do? If an insulin pump eats batteries at a 20% higher rate than advertised, the quality sucks, but that doesn't mean that the product isn't needed. It's up to the company to fix the quality flaws and bring the product up to market expectation. No product is ever perfect. That's near impossible to do. But darn close is attainable. And quality is very much objective in most products given that you can collect quality metrics on the products themselves, log bugs, measure impact, etc. On 10/19/07, Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality would be > irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, the "crap" would > languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be working rather than having > this discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, > Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - > Enterprise Websites -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager http://techcommdood.blogspot.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
I can't see how quality can possibly be subjective if there's an entire occupation devoted to assuring it. Perhaps TW has only worked in environments where "quality" is merely a buzzword. On 10/19/07, Flato, Gillian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is not > subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs reported > by customers and QA people, the software application is crap. -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager http://techcommdood.blogspot.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
And yet people still buy it. If they did not, issues of quality would be irrelevant; only the "quality" items would be purchased, the "crap" would languish on the dealer shelves, and we would be working rather than having this discussion.http://www.tekwrytrs.com/Specializing in the Design, Development, and Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:55:33 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is not subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs reported by customers and QA people, the software application is crap. Thank you, Gillian Flato Technical Writer (Software) nanometrics 1550 Buckeye Dr. Milpitas, CA. 95035 (408.545.6316 7 408.232.5911 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:52 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective. Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an >>objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, quality is crap, that's not subjective. TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I am taking about. BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are. Thank you, Gillian Flato Technical Writer (Software) nanometrics 1550 Buckeye Dr. Milpitas, CA. 95035 (408.545.6316 7 408.232.5911 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective opinions of the minority.< From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, > > Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. > > I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until the board of Directors wis
RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Technical Writer wrote: > Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the > first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business > strategy of Sony. Sony is a good company with solid products, but their track record on innovations sucks. They brought us, among others, Beta videocassettes, MD (MiniDisc) cartridges, and Memory Sticks. I'm not the only person who saw that Sony was behind the Blu Ray format and consequently decided to bet on HD DVD. :-) Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 -- ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is not
subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs reported
by customers and QA people, the software application is crap.
Thank you,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gillian Flato
Technical Writer (Software)
nanometrics
1550 Buckeye Dr.
Milpitas, CA. 95035
(408.545.6316
7 408.232.5911
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .com
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:52 AM
To: Flato, Gillian; framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs
The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems,
and a host of others. That does not change the fact that in most
software applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective.
Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:09:42 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com
>>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;
>>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again
an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases.
When you work in the semi-conductor industry making
high-tech instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants),
quality is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few
thousand cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of
running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, quality
is crap, that's not subjective.
TechWriters in my field document the software that runs
on these types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of
tools I am taking about.
BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so
sanctimonious yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell
us who you are.
Thank you,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gillian Flato
Technical Writer (Software)
nanometrics
1550 Buckeye Dr.
Milpitas, CA. 95035
(408.545.6316
7 408.232.5911
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
.com
From: Technical Writer
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:37 AM
To: Flato, Gillian; framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs
And I know of a CEO who used to either get there
first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates.
Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;
witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite
the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting
orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is
again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all
cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and
"the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective.
Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is
producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user,
and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is
being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful.
If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or
she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and
writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and
how those influence and constrain the production of technical
documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly
replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on
developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable
quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users)
details of grammar, construction, or voice.
In that direction may lie the future of TW--get
it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of
satisfying the needs of the major
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems, and a host of others. That does not change the fact that in most software applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective. Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubsDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:09:42 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com >>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; >>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an >>objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, quality is crap, that's not subjective. TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I am taking about. BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are. Thank you, Gillian Flato Technical Writer (Software) nanometrics 1550 Buckeye Dr. Milpitas, CA. 95035 (408.545.6316 7 408.232.5911 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:37 AMTo: Flato, Gillian; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: radical revamping of techpubs And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective opinions of the minority.< From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, > > Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. > > I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until the board of Directors wisely fired him and put a new CEO at the helm.> > > -Gillian> > Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! Try now! _ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
>>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;
>>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not
an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases.
When you work in the semi-conductor industry making high-tech
instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants), quality is
not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few thousand cycles or
a part on the tool fails after only a few months of running, then it's
objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, quality is crap, that's not
subjective.
TechWriters in my field document the software that runs on these types
of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of tools I am taking
about.
BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so sanctimonious yet
you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell us who you are.
Thank you,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gillian Flato
Technical Writer (Software)
nanometrics
1550 Buckeye Dr.
Milpitas, CA. 95035
(408.545.6316
7 408.232.5911
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .com
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Technical Writer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:37 AM
To: Flato, Gillian; framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs
And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let
the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates.
Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of
the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue
Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required.
Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an
objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of
Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The
opinions are subjective.
Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality
documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes
customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being
documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful.
If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should
change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The
option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those
influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a
world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy
documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that
enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather
than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar,
construction, or voice.
In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get
it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the
needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective
opinions of the minority.
< From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com
>
> ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is
everything,
>
> Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If
you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you
were first on the market is irrelevant.
>
> I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being
first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other
company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products,
stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until
the board of Directors wisely fired him and put a new CEO at the helm.
>
>
> -Gillian
>
>
Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows
Live OneCare! Try now!
<http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hot
mailnews>
___
You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com
Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
The presumption was made that Microsoft has market share due to time-to-market push by Gates, and that is a gross oversimplification. It has a lot more to do with cut-throat marketing tactics and industrial espionage (end justifies the means to Gates) than it does with simply driving a product forward, although Gates' time-to-market priorities do explain the fact that people generally avoid new MS products for 6-12 mo until the service packs that fix the most egregious bugs are available. Without ample testing, lower quality products are released, and after repeatedly seeing this, users are wary to buy the new versions upon release. The same goes for documentation - many people avoid the documentation that comes with a new release in favor of either after-market docs or the company's updated post-release documents. Microsoft's answer to this has been to force upgrades by refusing to issue any new licenses on the more stable, older version as soon as the new one comes out, regardless of the bugs. That is why MS gets reamed about Vista by the "Dilberts" (borrowing the term from earlier in this thread). It is costly in time (and therefore manhours and therefore money) to have to work around crappy products or wade through crappy documentation. Continuing to produce crap and fix it on the second pass causes a loss of faith in the customer base, and they start looking for more hassle-free alternatives. Then, the company can either choose to be more conscientious and earn the loyalty of their customers, or they can bully the competition out of the market to force the customer into a no-other-viable-choice scenario. MS has done the latter more than the former. Rene ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Many, especially in business, would argue the opposite; the first mover advantage is huge. Case in point, the business strategy of Sony. The philosophy of "lifers"--build a widget, establish a broad base of loyal, satisfied customers, grow the organization organically is about as obsolete as "Live long and prosper." Ask any small business owner in a location adjacent to Wal-Mart about customer loyalty and branding. Or ask anyone who worked in the Oldsmobile division of GM. > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:30:49 -0700> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL > PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: > First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)> > Despite the > incredible pressure that people feel to be the first on > the market with the > latest release, I think history shows that it is > almost NEVER the first > product to market that has long-term success, > at least in high-tech. The > IBM PC was not the first to market by a > number of years. Microsoft hasn't > ever gotten there first with > anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. > WordStar. Doc-to-Help was, > I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they > got outmarketed > ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better > overall format > but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And so on. > It > could be argued that what tends to work is the products that watched > > what the first product did and then didn't make the same mistakes or > at > least capitalized on marketing. There are exceptions to > this--Visio comes > to mind--where something is so truly innovative as > to be unique, but these > are rare and stellar examples. For the most > part, the first product to > cross the finish line is guaranteed to > ~not~ survive the test of time.> > > Even on a short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an > > arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool > enough to > install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or > Adobe? And who, > having done that, got away with it with their > computing skin intact? Robert > Cringely was nice enough to quote me > in his column a couple months ago: "At > Microsoft, quality is job > SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to > a lot of companies, > not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same > pressures and > make the same mistakes.> > If I knew that a company was > actively taking a few extra months to > plan things and deliver me a bug-free > product, I'd be very impressed > and would consider that heavily when > shopping for something.> > > Yours truly,> > John Hedtke> > Author/Consultant/Contract Writer> www.hedtke.com <-- website> 541-685-5000 > (office landline)> 541-554-2189 (cell)> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (primary email)> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (secondary email) > _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook – together at last. Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
Clearly Chris hasn't used a Mac since System 7...;-)...might be interested to know that OSX is built on BSD! Most users "never see a blue screen of death"? Be serious. But I suppose this is all off topic... Neil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Chris Borokowski Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:50 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs I'm not sure the question here is one of quality as much as different purposes. If you want most stuff to install quickly and work the first time, want flexibility about what hardware you can use, and want compatibility with most people out there, Windows is a clear winner, and most users never see a blue screen of death. If you want a UNIX-like operating system that's free and gives you some flexibility of hardware, but don't mind fiddling with software and OS settings, Linux is a good choice. If you want a stable snazzy operating system, and want few hardware choices and don't care what it costs you or how often it breaks down, you pick Macintosh. I think there's an important lesson there for TWs. User profiles are generally a big time-waster when people make up users complete with names and histories. But recognizing the different general functions users want to fulfil, and as a result the choices they make, is really important. Not everyone wants the bulletproof operating system. If they did, we'd all run BSD ;) --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the > population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue > Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. > Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not > an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian > flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by > some. The opinions are subjective. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/neil.tubb%40solacesy stems.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
I'm not sure the question here is one of quality as much as different purposes. If you want most stuff to install quickly and work the first time, want flexibility about what hardware you can use, and want compatibility with most people out there, Windows is a clear winner, and most users never see a blue screen of death. If you want a UNIX-like operating system that's free and gives you some flexibility of hardware, but don't mind fiddling with software and OS settings, Linux is a good choice. If you want a stable snazzy operating system, and want few hardware choices and don't care what it costs you or how often it breaks down, you pick Macintosh. I think there's an important lesson there for TWs. User profiles are generally a big time-waster when people make up users complete with names and histories. But recognizing the different general functions users want to fulfil, and as a result the choices they make, is really important. Not everyone wants the bulletproof operating system. If they did, we'd all run BSD ;) --- Technical Writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the > population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue > Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. > Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not > an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian > flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by > some. The opinions are subjective. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be the first on the market with the latest release, I think history shows that it is almost NEVER the first product to market that has long-term success, at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the first to market by a number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten there first with anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. Doc-to-Help was, I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they got outmarketed ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better overall format but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And so on. It could be argued that what tends to work is the products that watched what the first product did and then didn't make the same mistakes or at least capitalized on marketing. There are exceptions to this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly innovative as to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. For the most part, the first product to cross the finish line is guaranteed to ~not~ survive the test of time. Even on a short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and make the same mistakes. If I knew that a company was actively taking a few extra months to plan things and deliver me a bug-free product, I'd be very impressed and would consider that heavily when shopping for something. Yours truly, John Hedtke Author/Consultant/Contract Writer www.hedtke.com <-- website 541-685-5000 (office landline) 541-554-2189 (cell) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (primary email) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (secondary email) ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
And I know of a CEO who used to either get there first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates. Quality is primarily a subjective opinion; witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and "the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective. Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user, and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful. If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and how those influence and constrain the production of technical documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users) details of grammar, construction, or voice. In that direction may lie the future of TW--get it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over the subjective opinions of the minority. < From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; framers@lists.frameusers.com> > ...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, > > Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. > > I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until the board of Directors wisely fired him and put a new CEO at the helm.> > > -Gillian> > _ Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
First on market (was RE: radical revamping of techpubs)
Despite the incredible pressure that people feel to be the first on the market with the latest release, I think history shows that it is almost NEVER the first product to market that has long-term success, at least in high-tech. The IBM PC was not the first to market by a number of years. Microsoft hasn't ever gotten there first with anything that comes to mind. VisiCalc. WordStar. Doc-to-Help was, I think, on the market before Robohelp, yet they got outmarketed ultimately. VHS vs. Beta: Beta was, and is, a better overall format but VHS outmarketed Beta and >poof< no more Beta. And so on. It could be argued that what tends to work is the products that watched what the first product did and then didn't make the same mistakes or at least capitalized on marketing. There are exceptions to this--Visio comes to mind--where something is so truly innovative as to be unique, but these are rare and stellar examples. For the most part, the first product to cross the finish line is guaranteed to ~not~ survive the test of time. Even on a short-term basis, pushing a product out the door to meet an arbitrary schedule gets you what you deserve. Who here is fool enough to install the .0 version of anything from, say, Microsoft or Adobe? And who, having done that, got away with it with their computing skin intact? Robert Cringely was nice enough to quote me in his column a couple months ago: "At Microsoft, quality is job SP1," but this is an aphorism you could apply to a lot of companies, not just the folks in Redmond. They all feel the same pressures and make the same mistakes. If I knew that a company was actively taking a few extra months to plan things and deliver me a bug-free product, I'd be very impressed and would consider that heavily when shopping for something. Yours truly, John Hedtke Author/Consultant/Contract Writer www.hedtke.com <-- website 541-685-5000 (office landline) 541-554-2189 (cell) john at hedtke.com (primary email) johnhedtke at aol.com (secondary email)
RE: radical revamping of techpubs
...or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, Time-to-market is not everything if you sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. I know a CEO who got fired because all he cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company almost went under until the board of Directors wisely fired him and put a new CEO at the helm. -Gillian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Technical Writer Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:35 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: radical revamping of techpubs The "external documentation" recommended for XP and agile development is fundamentally different than the documentation model used in old-style waterfall design. Because the application itself is built in an iterative process, rather than being carved in stone, reacting to feedback from the client, documentation before the last minute is pointless. The reason should be obvious; the application being documented in the early stages bears little resemblance to the application delivered. That is not incompetence on the part of the people footing the bill, nor chicanery on the part of the developer. It is directly related to the reason why online help files are viewed so dimly by the average user; the user doesn't know what to ask to get the answer they need. Similarly, the client may think he, she, or they want ab and d, when what they really need is wx and a little y. Until they see a prototype of ab and d, they may not honestly realize that ab and d is not what they need. There are some developers who attach themselves to large corporations, turn out bloated monstrosities that do very little, and insist that everything be cut-and-dried and filed in triplicate before the first line of code is written. That presupposes that the client knows up front exactly what the final deliverable should be. That is almost never the case. Change is what XP does really well, and in that change, it is pointless to document the app at each iteration, then toss all the carefully crafted prose because it doesn't describe reality now, and only describes what reality used to be. In 2007, software developers other than Microsoft, Oracle, or similar biggies realize that time-to-market is everything, and first mover advantage goes to the swift. Lean management and agile development are attempts to gain a competitive advantage or a bit more market share. There is little point in obsessing over whether or not the end user recognizes symmetry or consistent voice in the documentation when your competitor is outflanking and outrunning you by hiring double your developer staff in Bangalore. There is room for the old-style, Java Dilbert developers, and for those who document their doings. However, a lot of orgs are realizing that the first step in software development is a workable prototype and a good, solid proof-of-concept. Beyond that, they are also realizing that having a competent business analyst watching over the development process is a major advantage; especially if the BA has enough business sense to know when to pull the plug, send the developers and contractors home, and declare the mess as over. Case in point; Inkos. They were trying to implement SAP ERP software, and were $25 million into it before a new IT manager pulled the plug and declared it "inappropriate for Inkos." Along with the documentation that was supposed to tell the IT staff how to use the spiffy new apps. In short, the pie-in-the-sky is often in the eyes of the client declaring "requirements," when they don't know yet exactly what they want. They know generally enough to welcome XP, and a quickie prototype that enables them to understand exactly what they really want and need. Building software is not like building a bridge or skyscraper, and the simplistic similes to building a house without a detailed blueprint are misleading. When you build a house, you are not usually in a race with the contractor down the road to complete and get on the market first or wind up with a major piece of nothing. You can always sell the house at a discount, and recover all or most of your investment. Clients for a software application dragged out over years of development time might find that its value decreases at a faster rate than it is being developed, and by the time it is delivered, it is outmoded, outdated, and pretty much useless. Whether it is well-documented or not is irrelevant. _ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook - together at last. Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL10
Re: radical revamping of techpubs
I agree, and if there's one reason many people think technical writing has a bad name, it's this. The churned-out documentation where the writer is left with so little time and support they create a transcription of the obvious, with little informational content or sense of how they can make the users relax and understand the application on a power user level. Most of the documentation I read is so horrible it's beyond conception, but I think that this mentality of showing up late and churning out the manual, which I call WTFM, is at fault, not necessarily the writer. (I have to add that in many cases, people who are not writers are pressed into service as writers, and their dislike of that situation causes more problems than their level of talent and education for it.) --- Rene Stephenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And that's exactly why so much of the documentation is > frustrating for the customer to use. You can't generate technically > correct content that is usable and well-planned and free of glaring > typos and grammatical errors when you are only given an average of 30 > minutes per page of output. http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/ technical writing | consulting | development __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
