Re: metrics

Subject: Re: metrics
From: Barb Philbrick <barb -dot- philbrick -at- PCOHIO -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 1994 09:03:00 -0500

S>|} M>I have
S>|} M>heard that Microsoft charges the TW department for each call
S>|} M>Support takes. I don't know how well this works.

S>|} I hope they differentiate between software problems and document
S>|} problems. Overall, their documentation is good, except where they
S>|} happily tell you about features that don't work. Most of my calls
S>|} to software companies are because of program flaws, not because the
S>|} documentation didn't cover something.

S>Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean, Barb, but in my book, if I
S>happily tell your customer about a feature that doesn't work, that's
S>a document flaw. ``C'est plus qu'un crime, c'est une faute,'' as they
S>say, ``It's worse than a crime, it's a mistake!''

I understand what you're saying, and up to a point, you're right. I
should have clarified - the problems I've been seeing apparently occur
primarily with long, graphics-intensive documents. How much testing
should the technical writing folks have done to discover when the
product no longer worked? I think some problems do fall back into the
programmers' laps if it comes to blame-casting (and billing

* CMPQwk 1.4 #9107 * Support free trade: Smuggle!

Previous by Author: Re: invalid
Next by Author: Re: Raunchy business name
Previous by Thread: Re: Metrics
Next by Thread: Re: Software documentatio

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads