TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Re: system configuration: required vs. recommended ?
Subject:Re: system configuration: required vs. recommended ? From:"Yvette Kirby Waters" <yvetteki -at- noa -dot- nintendo -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:16:06 -0700
In our SDK, we list the minimum system requirements for running our software, but we don't make a distinction between "required" and "recommended." The way our SDK works, any hardware configuration better than the minimum would be, well, *better*. <g>
I can see why some software companies would list both, though. A user may be able to run the bare-bones installation of an app on their P133 and still get good use out of it, but if they want to use *all* the suite's bells and whistles, and/or any add-ons, then they'll need a P3 or whatever.
The point is that the minimum system requirements should be *realistic* and based on real usage and performance testing. Being able to launch an application when no other apps are running (on a Tuesday when the moon is full <g>) is does *not* make the grade for minimum system requirement!
So making the distinction is useful, but should be based on realistic parameters.
Just my .02,
--Yvette
--Yvette Kirby Waters
Technical Writer
Nintendo Technology Development, Inc.
vox: (425) 861-2968
fax: (425) 861-2976
>>> "Sarah Hosking" <shosking -at- pivotal -dot- com> 06/26/01 01:37PM >>>
What is the purpose of listing both the "required" and "recommended" system
configuration? Why do this when the recommended configuration is really
the only way the software will run well enough to be usable.
When I worked in tech support, I regurlary fielded calls from furious
customers who had read on the box that all they needed was, say, a 486 with
16 Mb of RAM, when in reality that was only enough to launch the application
(barely). If they wanted to actually perform any tasks against their data,
they would need 64 Mb and pentium.
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
Sponsored by Cub Lea, specialist in low-cost outsourced development
and documentation. Overload and time-sensitive jobs at exceptional
rates. Unique free gifts for all visitors to http://www.cublea.com
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
