Re: Why manuals?

Subject: Re: Why manuals?
From: Elaine Winters <ewinters -at- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 09:32:04 -0700

In addition to all of Richard's arguements - - and those of
others (pro and con), PAPER [IMHO] is the *true* and even
'politically a bit more correct' as a reason.

Yes, indeed, CD-ROM is an expensive investment - - can be
used, virtually forever, updated when necessary and is not
made from tree corpses.
E. Winters: Principal Program Facilitating and Consulting
Berkeley, CA, USA 510-843-0909 ewinters -at- netcom -dot- com
Instructional Design * Interactivity * Cross - Cultural Communication

On Wed, 21 Sep 1994, Richard Mateosian wrote:

> The paper software manual is dead.

> I'd prefer to believe the opposite. User preferences cited on this list just
> yesterday seem to say the opposite. But consider these facts:

> Nobody has ever learned FrameMaker4 or Word6 or Photoshop3 or any other
> major package by reading the paper documentation supplied with it.

> The size and complexity of software packages are increasing explosively,
> with no end in sight. The technology of paper manuals can't keep up. The
> semiconductor and disk memories that support software advances will provide
> a medium for increasingly complex user guidance and training.

> The technologies that make on-line multimedia user assistance possible are
> planting seeds in users' minds. Paper manuals will continue to appeal to
> users' nostalgia but won't satisfy their expectations.

> Film of the funeral at 11. ...RM

> Richard Mateosian Technical Writer in Berkeley CA srm -at- c2 -dot- org

Previous by Author: Re: Preparing doc for use beyond the culture of origin . .
Next by Author: Re: Online/print & the design of organization . . .
Previous by Thread: Re: Why manuals?
Next by Thread: Re: Why manuals?

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

Sponsored Ads