In house third-party manuals (Re: Recognition at last!)

Subject: In house third-party manuals (Re: Recognition at last!)
From: Eric Haddock <eric -at- ENGAGENET -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 10:59:10 -0600

>I think Microsoft is facing up to the reality that users will buy third
>party books anyway for user procedures because theirs have been so bad.

Which is sad. Third party books are slaps in the face of the people who
did the original documentation. I know I'd feel all down in the dumps if
someone put one out to counter one of my manuals. Wouldn't you? I don't
begrudge the people who write them or anything--sometimes they're needed
books (a sad commentary). Other times they're needlessly hulking bricks of
text used to cash in on fears about included documentation (another sad
commentary but that's another topic).

There is a solution: companies should create their own publishing label
and publish documentation under that label. That way, the public will think
the docs are third party, assume it's better than what the package has, and
buy it. Plus, it will be the first "third party" manual on the market and
get that all-important initial market share. Not only will the manual get
read--but it's additional revenue for the company. Neat, huh?
There are a couple problems but hey--I'm going to suggest it to my
president after lunch. ;)




/`-_ Eric Haddock ------ http://www2.corenet.net/moonlion
{ }/ Technical writer
\ | Engage Networks, Inc. ----- http://www.engagenet.com
\__*| located in the Historic Third Ward of Milwaukee, WI


Previous by Author: TWers--the human Snap-On tool of industry (was Re: Query -- Software doc writer's responsibilities)
Next by Author: Style guides (in house) doubling as procedural manuals
Previous by Thread: Re: TWers--the human Snap-On tool of industry (was Re: Query
Next by Thread: Re: In house third-party manuals (Re: Recognition at last!)


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads