[PStamler]

On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one reason and one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition, which provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure they can get away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user manual as well as the physical product.

Peace,
Paul

[S. King]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:25:21 -0700, PStamler wrote:

On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one reason
and one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition, which
provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure they can get
away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.

Peace,
Paul

I've written and produced a lot of videos over the years for manufacturers
explaining to customers how to use products. My experience is that they
do care about accuracy, clarity, usefulness. Typically, I'm dealing with
rather high-cost stuff. Often I have a committee of engineers who
designed the gizmo and sales-support people who work with customers who
use the gizmo checking my work from script to finished video. I have
frequently been asked to simplify product history and theory of
operation. The explanation often is that the user base is not very
technical and not very educated. They want to know which knob to turn to
make the gizmo do what they want, or on which two test points to put the
VOM probes and what to do if the reading is out of spec. I realize that
this is different than writing a text book that purports to explain theory.

Paul is almost certainly right about the needs and motivations of
manufacturers regarding user manuals. I would add that if enough
customers complained and/or chewed up support resources that cost the
manufacturer money, they would change.

I still believe I am almost certainly right about the reasons for the
success of your marketing. Because, like you, I am never wrong. Ever.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Steve

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...

I once tried to twist Mr Mackie's arm into letting me rewrite the
mixer manual. It was /locally/ well-written, but poorly organized.
It needed to be laid out from the perspective of someone who had no
practical experience with mixers, and had to be instructed from the
ground up, starting with the simplest things (ie, where do you plug
in a mic and how do you set its level?).

Basically, it's the manufacturers' responsibility to provide this
sort of documentation. To the extent they don't, you have a market.

Sure they do. But you don't write for the intended audience:
people who want to know how to use the equipment. You
write for yourself, to impress yourself, and to try to prop up
the unsupportable position that you're always right. Nobody
wants to read that ****, especially not if they have to pay
for it.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
I'm answering this directly.

No, you're jerking around. And off.

I have an odd approach to learning things.

But people who pay to have books written don't give a
**** about your learning disabilities, and they don't
want to pay to to masturbate in print.

I'm more interested in principles than facts.

Well, I thinks it's well established that you don't give a
flying **** about facts, despite your persistent denial.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
"No wonder no one wants to hire this idiot..."
I'm "sorry",

YOu've already established that your apologies are
insincere. No need for the scare quotes.

Mr No-Name, but as a technical writer, I usually know what I'm
doing.

But apparently you're not a technical writer. You're a bum.

I don't need your approval,

Of course you don't. All you need is someone to hire
you, but you refuse to produce anything that they want.

nor will I grovel in front of you

Of course you won't. You're too busy pretending you're never wrong.
You may be fooling yourself, but you're not fooling anyone else.

asking for permission to speak in public on subjects I know
something about.

What the ****? Who's expecting you ask permission?
Plenty of people would like you to shut the **** up, but
nobody's asking you to grovel or ask for permission.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/18/2013 5:57 PM, S. King wrote:

I've written and produced a lot of videos over the years for manufacturers
explaining to customers how to use products. My experience is that they
do care about accuracy, clarity, usefulness.

I don't think that it's a matter that manufacturers don't care about
having a good manual,, it's that the users have told them that they
don't the read manuals, good or bad. They just dive in, and then call
Tech Support or get on a forum with their questions.

A good video probably costs as much to produce as a good manual, but you
have something that the user can watch end to end in 15 minutes or so,
he downloads it so they have no printing or packaging costs, and they
don't care if the user throws it away.

Personally, I like to have a manual for reference. I read it before I
start using the device and ten years later when I forget how to use a
feature (or that it has the feature) I can look it up pretty quickly in
the manual. Videos are a good "show and tell" but they're a lousy
reference.


--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
"None" wrote in message
m...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...

LOL! "Calling you out". What a ****ing asshole! In a world
where you could invent your own definitions, and no other
definitions ever have any validity, you could probably make
a case that you're always right. But in the real world, where
definitions exist by common understanding, your refusal
to accept common understanding just leaves you behind
as an unemployable loser.

And in all your long, rich existence, you have never had the
experience of reading or hearing some "expert" say something. and
reacting "Wait. That's wrong."?

Sure. In fact, that so-called expert is frequently you, Bunky.
One of the subject that you're usually wrong about is whether
you're wrong.

It's interesting that Mike Rivers and Ron Capik -- who have writing
experience -- aren't so quick to dump on me. (I'm /not/ saying they
approve of everything I say or do.) Could it be they know you can't
write well about things you don't understand?


"But in the real world, where definitions exist by common
understanding..."

Which is another way of saying that common belief is fact -- which
it isn't.

No, it's not another way of saying that. Not even close.
What a crock of ****. No wonder you can't get work.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
My marketing approach has always been "I can help you provide better
customer support and improve customer satisfaction". It has worked
in only one case that I remember.

In all the other cases, you've been wrong, apparently

Isn't anyone bothered that the expensive books they buy are often
poorly written and organized? Or that they have only rarely been
edited for technical accuracy?

Of course people are bothered by that. My, you are
a wellspring of strawmen!

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
My marketing approach has always been "I can help you provide
better customer support and improve customer satisfaction".
It has worked in only one case that I remember.

SNIP

Your marketing approach is probably fine. I suspect that potential
employers spend a few minutes in conversation with you or in
written
communication with you and conclude that you are trouble with a
capital T, unable to play or work effectively with others, and
likely
to harm the enterprise more than you might help.

You suspect far too much.

In many cases I have offered my services as an independent
contractor who would work off site.

I guess the comment just went right over your head.
Not surprising, with your head up your asshole.

[William Sommerwerck]

"S. King" wrote in message ...

I've written and produced a lot of videos over the years for manufacturers
explaining to customers how to use products. My experience is that they
do care about accuracy, clarity, usefulness. Typically, I'm dealing with
rather high-cost stuff. Often I have a committee of engineers who
designed the gizmo and sales-support people who work with customers who
use the gizmo checking my work from script to finished video. I have
frequently been asked to simplify product history and theory of
operation. The explanation often is that the user base is not very
technical and not very educated. They want to know which knob to turn to
make the gizmo do what they want, or on which two test points to put the
VOM probes and what to do if the reading is out of spec. I realize that
this is different than writing a text book that purports to explain theory.

You're fortunate to have been able to work on such products. The
most-expensive thing I own (other than my car) is a Pioneer plasma TV. It has
the most God-awful user manual I've ever seen (even worse than those for my
DSLRs). It tells you essentially nothing about how to get the most out of the
set -- and it runs 150 pages!


Paul is almost certainly right about the needs and motivations of
manufacturers regarding user manuals. I would add that if enough
customers complained and/or chewed up support resources that
cost the manufacturer money, they would change.

But when you point out that good documentation will reduce the number of calls
they have to answer, they're hardly ever interested. It makes no sense.

It seems companies have largely "off-loaded" customer support onto user-run
support groups, effectively sweeping the problem under the rug.

By the way, Linksys (Cisco) has excellent customer support. The techs actually
know what they're talking about, and provide solid information. This is one of
the reasons I buy Linksys products.


I still believe I am almost certainly right about the reasons for the
success of your marketing. Because, like you, I am never wrong.
Ever. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Actually, I say that I am hardly ever wrong. But I don't care whether or not
you're kidding. I agree. You should never hide your light under a bushel. If a
courteous approach doesn't work, lay it on the line. (This sometimes works
with men, but never with women.)

One of the nice things about being retired is that you can often say exactly
what you like to a potential employer. Some months after I added a description
of a new feature to the user manual for HDR software, the company's owner came
back to me to redo the entire manual. She got upset when she learned that I
was not thoroughly familiar with the product, and I told her it didn't matter,
because I would pick it up as I went along, with her programmers answering
specific questions as they arose. She didn't like that at all -- especially as
she was offering $50 an hour, which I found more of a bribe than a fair wage.
I told her where to get off.

I understand -- and even sympathize -- with wanting a writer who already
understands your product. In her case, she had a professional photographer who
understood it forwards, backwards, and sideways. But he can't write. His book
on HDR processing has magnificent photos, but is poorly organized and written.

From my perspective, it's easier for a writer to learn a product, than for a
product expert to learn how to write. This is similar to the way William S
Gilbert saw things -- he wanted actors who could sing, not singers who could
act.

The company is still in business, but given how cameras are increasingly
incorporating HDR processing, its continued success might depend on the
quality of its documentation. One of the purposes of documentation is to
minimize the amount of experimentation needed to use the product effectively.
Many companies think it's enough to describe the features. It isn't.

[William Sommerwerck]

"None" wrote in message
m...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...

I once tried to twist Mr Mackie's arm into letting me rewrite the mixer
manual. It was /locally/ well-written, but poorly organized. It needed to
be laid out from the perspective of someone who had no practical experience
with mixers, and had to be instructed from the ground up, starting with the
simplest things (ie, where do you plug in a mic and how do you set its
level?).
Basically, it's the manufacturers' responsibility to provide this sort of
documentation. To the extent they don't, you have a market.

Sure they do. But you don't write for the intended audience:
people who want to know how to use the equipment. You
write for yourself, to impress yourself, and to try to prop up
the unsupportable position that you're always right. Nobody
wants to read that ****, especially not if they have to pay for it.

Do you actually think that's an intelligent remark that will win you admirers?
You cannot imagine how stupid it sounds -- especially as you've never read any
of my documentation. You just like being nasty, don't you?

I ALWAYS write for someone who isn't familiar with the product. He/she is
always your audience. Too many manuals are written on the assumption that the
user already knows how to use the product!

One woman wrote to Software Bisque, saying "I often have trouble using
software. But I just followed the instructions and it worked." This was
because I always double-check my instructions to make sure they'll work when
blindly followed.

[William Sommerwerck]

I've snipped the nasty and pointless remarks. I have the feeling None is
approaching a psychotic break.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
I've snipped the nasty and pointless remarks. I have the feeling
None is approaching a psychotic break.

You've "snipped"? Howzat? You deleted something from Usenet?
Did you forget to read the manual, or was it that you forgot to write
it?

You've insulted everyone who frequents this newsgroup, and
compounded the insult with a phony apology. That's pretty
nasty and pointless, but pretending that you "snipped"
something is not only pointless, it's also clueless.

[hank alrich]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

I once tried to twist Mr Mackie's arm into letting me rewrite the mixer
manual. It was /locally/ well-written, but poorly organized. It needed to be
laid out from the perspective of someone who had no practical experience with
mixers, and had to be instructed from the ground up, starting with the
simplest things (ie, where do you plug in a mic and how do you set its
level?).

Hmmm... The manual for my "vintage" 1202 fits that demand nicely.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[Luxey]

Seams William, demand for your level of expertise disappeared as soon as WWW caught some ground?

[Trevor]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...
On 6/18/2013 9:49 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
How about a book titled "Installing and Maintaining PA Systems"?
Wouldn't there be a market for that?

There are already a couple of books that cover that subject pretty well,
the Yamaha Sound Reinforcement Handbook and Sound System Engineering (the
Don Davis bunch).

A title like that would scare away the people I want to write for. This
would be a book for the person who posts on a fourm: "I just bought a new
mixer. Can someone tell me the best way to hook it up?"

But such a person isn't likely to pay for a book when the information
usually already came with their mixer (although they haven't read it yet
presumably) and basic information is also readilly available free on the
internet.

Trevor.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Luxey" wrote in message
...

Seems, William, demand for your level of expertise
disappeared as soon as WWW caught some ground?

Possibly. Product managers might have felt that anyone could write a brief
explanation of a particular feature, eliminating the need for someone who
understood how to organize and present material.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Trevor" wrote in message ...
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...

A title like that would scare away the people I want to write for.
This would be a book for the person who posts on a fourm: "I just
bought a new mixer. Can someone tell me the best way to hook it up?"

But such a person isn't likely to pay for a book when the information
usually already came with their mixer (although they haven't read it
yet, presumably) and basic information is also readilly available free
on the Internet.

Are there Web documents that step a raw beginner through the process of
understanding how a mixer is set up and operated?

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/18/2013 7:44 PM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

But when you point out that good documentation will reduce the number of
calls they have to answer, they're hardly ever interested. It makes no
sense.

Seems like this would make great sense, but there are (at least) two
forces against it, and I'm not making this up. I've been there.

One is that some companies put significant (marketing) value on having
personal contact with their customers. It's not just a bunch of dumdums
sitting around waiting for the phone to ring, it's a very closely
managed part of the business. If someone calls, even with a dumb
question, they learn something useful about their customer base. If they
find that they're getting repeated calls about the same thing, it tells
the company that there's something they need to change or fix. And if
the tech support exchange is successful, that customer is likely to
respond, some time, to some person, on a forum, that the company has
great customer service.

The other thing is that (and I wish I could get Verizon to believe this)
not all problems can be resolved by going through a script, nor can they
be solved by RTFM. You can't tell a customer, either in a manual or via
direct communication: "we didn't design it for that purpose so we won't
help you." Sometimes it's necessary to think along with the customer in
order to get him up to speed, or absolutely understand (and be able to
make the customer understand) that he can't do that.

By the way, Linksys (Cisco) has excellent customer support. The techs
actually know what they're talking about, and provide solid information.
This is one of the reasons I buy Linksys products.

See?? Unfortunately, I have very little need for Linksys products, and
those that I do have have never needed anything but to be plugged in and
they work. But I understand that they have products that probably need a
well trained technician to set up or troubleshoot.

One of the nice things about being retired is that you can often say
exactly what you like to a potential employer.

I've done that and it usually results in no job.

Some months after I added
a description of a new feature to the user manual for HDR software, the
company's owner came back to me to redo the entire manual. She got upset
when she learned that I was not thoroughly familiar with the product,

I used to participate actively on the PreSonus forum. I got familiar
with a few of their pieces of gear when I had them for reviews. If
you've ever seen one of my reviews, often it's like a re-write or an
addition to the manual. But since they don't make anything that I need,
I don't own any of their products. Apparently a user got upset because a
non-user was telling him how to use their equipment.

From my perspective, it's easier for a writer to learn a product, than
for a product expert to learn how to write.

I've had some people tell me that a good writer can write about
anything. I don't agree. I wouldn't tackle a Pro Tools manual, for
example. I've also been told that a good writer can write a good manual
from a good product specification. He doesn't even need to see the
product. The problem with that, in this field, is that often product
specs aren't sufficiently detailed and the product grows in the
development process.


--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/19/2013 6:03 AM, Trevor wrote:

But such a person isn't likely to pay for a book when the information
usually already came with their mixer (although they haven't read it yet
presumably) and basic information is also readilly available free on the
internet.

That's the trouble with kids these days. They only know what they can
learn from the Internet for free.


--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Trevor]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...
On 6/19/2013 6:03 AM, Trevor wrote:
But such a person isn't likely to pay for a book when the information
usually already came with their mixer (although they haven't read it yet
presumably) and basic information is also readilly available free on the
internet.

That's the trouble with kids these days. They only know what they can
learn from the Internet for free.

True, but the alternative of only being able to afford a few expensive
text/reference books, and hoping they were both correct and comprehensive,
as was the norm in the past, is not much better.
I believe I can find more information for free now, than I could ever afford
to buy before the internet. And I still have the same fallback position of
borrowing books from the library where necessary, and available.

Trevor.

[Arny Krueger[_5_]]

"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one reason and
one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition, which
provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure they can get
away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.


In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user manual
is an interesting concept.

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers wrote:

I've had some people tell me that a good writer can write about
anything. I don't agree. I wouldn't tackle a Pro Tools manual, for
example. I've also been told that a good writer can write a good manual
from a good product specification. He doesn't even need to see the
product. The problem with that, in this field, is that often product
specs aren't sufficiently detailed and the product grows in the
development process.

A good writer with no experience on a subject creates fiction. Plenty of
those writers in the marketing departments.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[hank alrich]

Arny Krueger wrote:

"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one reason and
one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition, which
provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure they can get
away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.


In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user manual
is an interesting concept.

The congency of that remark is both hilarious and appalling. Thanks for
my opening morning chuckle, Arny.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:58:30 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one reason and
one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition, which
provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure they can get
away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.


In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user manual
is an interesting concept.

I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

d

[Arny Krueger[_5_]]

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:58:30 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one reason
and
one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition, which
provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure they can get
away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.

In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user manual
is an interesting concept.

I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

On balance there are tools that are so complex - a large digital console
being an example, that some kind of a reference manual may still be
justified. But not a small one.

OTOH, computer operating systems are probably among the most complex things
around, and I've haven't read the manual for one since Win95.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/19/2013 7:08 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

Are there Web documents that step a raw beginner through the process of
understanding how a mixer is set up and operated?

Apparently not. That's why I see a need for a book.


--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/19/2013 7:55 AM, Trevor wrote:

True, but the alternative of only being able to afford a few expensive
text/reference books, and hoping they were both correct and comprehensive,
as was the norm in the past, is not much better.

I wouldn't want to write a $90 book. I'd like to see it be under $20.
And anybody who would rather scramble around on the Internet looking for
what might be the right information rather than spend $20 for a book can
just go fumble. He probably wouldn't read the book anyway (which is why
he's looking on the Internet).

I believe I can find more information for free now, than I could ever afford
to buy before the internet.

Certainly, but there was a time when I didn't need all that information.
And I still don't need most of what I find that's interesting. And I
still can't find service documentation for a lot of the things I have
that need fixing.


--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/19/2013 7:58 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:

In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user manual
is an interesting concept.

This is certainly a good goal, but few achieve it. The next best thing
is to have a manual that explains enough things well enough so that the
user doesn't have to call Tech Support or go searching the Internet for
answers.



--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Arny Krueger[_5_]]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...
On 6/19/2013 7:55 AM, Trevor wrote:

True, but the alternative of only being able to afford a few expensive
text/reference books, and hoping they were both correct and
comprehensive,
as was the norm in the past, is not much better.

I wouldn't want to write a $90 book. I'd like to see it be under $20. And
anybody who would rather scramble around on the Internet looking for what
might be the right information rather than spend $20 for a book can just
go fumble. He probably wouldn't read the book anyway (which is why he's
looking on the Internet).

I believe I can find more information for free now, than I could ever
afford
to buy before the internet.

Certainly, but there was a time when I didn't need all that information.
And I still don't need most of what I find that's interesting. And I still
can't find service documentation for a lot of the things I have that need
fixing.

I got pretty deep into a fair number of analog mixers without looking at a
book, but never worked with one with VCAs or mute groups.

My first 02R96 got me into its manual pretty deeply any number of times.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:24:27 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:58:30 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one reason
and
one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition, which
provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure they can get
away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.

In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user manual
is an interesting concept.

I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

On balance there are tools that are so complex - a large digital console
being an example, that some kind of a reference manual may still be
justified. But not a small one.

OTOH, computer operating systems are probably among the most complex things
around, and I've haven't read the manual for one since Win95.


I find the complexity is rarely the problem, it is trying achieve too
many functions through too few actual controls. Unless the user has
the same mind-set as the programmer (has that ever been the case?)
then the tortuous routes through nested menus are going to flummox.

And so often the most frequently used functions are buried three
layers deep while the control to loop send number 10 to the line input
of channel 15 is right there on the home screen.

d

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/19/2013 1:04 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:

I got pretty deep into a fair number of analog mixers without looking at a
book, but never worked with one with VCAs or mute groups.

You're a pretty smart guy. The people I'm looking to write for don't
know what the controls do, but more important, how to hook up speakers
so they can hear something. Believe it or not, there are a lot of people
out there who know nothing about sound gear that they buy. And they
don't know anyone local who they can ask.

Back before the Internet, first off, not every band had two members who
bought sound equipment, and second, when they bought it, they bought it
from a dealer who could make sure they knew at least how to get sound
out of it. But that's not true today.

--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[William Sommerwerck]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

My first 02R96 got me into its manual
pretty deeply any number of times.

What were your reasons for turning to the manual?

[William Sommerwerck]

I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

But note that such a product performs a clearly defined set of functions that
users should already be familiar with. (The same goes for 'scopes and
multimeters.) Not all products do.

Furthermore, if a product /has/ to understandable without referring to the
manual, manufacturers might be disinclined to add innovative features.

But, yes, the controls, their operations, and their layout should "fit" with
the way experienced users expect to make measurements.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ...

In this day and age, someone selling something that requires
a user manual is an interesting concept.

This is certainly a good goal, but few achieve it. The next best thing
is to have a manual that explains enough things well enough so that
the user doesn't have to call Tech Support or go searching the Internet
for answers.

This is do-able. But it requires giving the writer sufficient time to figure
out the best way to do it, and not telling the writer how to write the manual.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:31:23 -0500, "Neil Gould"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:58:30 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck
wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one
reason and one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition,
which provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure
they can get away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.


In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user
manual is an interesting concept.

I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

If the equipment that you receive has fairly well-established or even
standardized modes of operation and connections, that's one thing. I can't
say that the same holds true for digital audio mixers beyond some
rudimentary gozintas and gozoutas. Everything in between is based on a
design group's philosophy that presumes a lot about what the purchaser
really wants to do. The higher the level of abstraction, such as those
mixers with almost no individualized controls, the more someone will need a
manual.

Well there's the thing. Mixing desks have been around long enough. The
big difference I can see is that the kind of equipment I use is
designed by people who actually use it the same way I do (and I have
designed test equipment myself), whereas with audio, a great deal (not
all, I know) of the design work is done by people who have never seen
the inside of a studio.

d

[Neil Gould]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:58:30 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck
wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one
reason and one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition,
which provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure
they can get away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.


In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user
manual is an interesting concept.

I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

If the equipment that you receive has fairly well-established or even
standardized modes of operation and connections, that's one thing. I can't
say that the same holds true for digital audio mixers beyond some
rudimentary gozintas and gozoutas. Everything in between is based on a
design group's philosophy that presumes a lot about what the purchaser
really wants to do. The higher the level of abstraction, such as those
mixers with almost no individualized controls, the more someone will need a
manual.
--
best regards,

Neil

[Neil Gould]

Arny Krueger wrote:

OTOH, computer operating systems are probably among the most complex
things around, and I've haven't read the manual for one since Win95.

Tried an Android tablet yet? No manuals and little consistency between the
basic functions of apps make it a "poke and stroke" environment ("why would
a user want or need to exit an app???"). 8-D

--
best regards,

Neil

[Ron C[_2_]]

On 6/19/2013 4:00 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:31:23 -0500, "Neil Gould"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:58:30 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"PStamler" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:56:04 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck
wrote:

When you buy a product with a lousy user manual, it's for one
reason and one

reason only -- the manufacturer doesn't care.

Or doesn't want to spend the money. They look at the competition,
which provides poor manuals and sells lots of product, and figure
they can get away with doing the same.

In writing reviews of products, I make a point of reviewing the user
manual as well as the physical product.


In this day and age, someone selling something that requires a user
manual is an interesting concept.

I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

If the equipment that you receive has fairly well-established or even
standardized modes of operation and connections, that's one thing. I can't
say that the same holds true for digital audio mixers beyond some
rudimentary gozintas and gozoutas. Everything in between is based on a
design group's philosophy that presumes a lot about what the purchaser
really wants to do. The higher the level of abstraction, such as those
mixers with almost no individualized controls, the more someone will need a
manual.

Well there's the thing. Mixing desks have been around long enough. The
big difference I can see is that the kind of equipment I use is
designed by people who actually use it the same way I do (and I have
designed test equipment myself), whereas with audio, a great deal (not
all, I know) of the design work is done by people who have never seen
the inside of a studio.

d

Hmm, I'm going to guess DAWs fall in to that category.
I tried Pro Tools lite and never quite got the hang of it.
Thank goodness don't mix enough to need to dive in.

==
Later...
Ron Capik
--

[Ron C[_2_]]

On 6/19/2013 3:56 PM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
I'm going to agree with this, at least in my major field, RF and
microwaves. I frequently get hold of a new piece of equipment - some
sort of generator and analyser - and am asked by the manufacturer to
assess it. If the manual has to come out of the shrink wrap, the
product has, as far as I am concerned, failed. I know exactly what the
thing should do, and I expect the sequence needed to achieve it to be
logical to the point of intuitive.

But note that such a product performs a clearly defined set of functions
that users should already be familiar with. (The same goes for 'scopes
and multimeters.) Not all products do.

Furthermore, if a product /has/ to understandable without referring to
the manual, manufacturers might be disinclined to add innovative features.

But, yes, the controls, their operations, and their layout should "fit"
with the way experienced users expect to make measurements.

I used to do a lot of photography back in the film/manual camera
days. I recently bought a digital SLR and was blown away by all
the automatic crap and figuring how to work around it. The controls,
their operations, and their layout /should have/ been a piece of cake.
I spent a lot of time reading the manual.

Then I jumped into Photoshop CS6. Yeeps!!! It's complex, highly nuanced,
and comes with no manual what-so-ever. Heck, it doesn't even come
with a basic help file.

Steep learning curves, but I'm now doing things I'd never dreamed of
doing with film and darkroom technology.

==
Later...
Ron Capik
--