radical revamping of techpubs

[Flato, Gillian]

I have seen enough bug reports in my time to know that quality is not
subjective. If the software generates a mile-long list of bugs reported
by customers and QA people, the software application is crap. 
 

Thank you,

 

<mailto:gflato at nanometrics.com> 

Gillian Flato

Technical Writer (Software)

nanometrics

1550 Buckeye Dr. 

Milpitas, CA. 95035

(408.545.6316

7  408.232.5911

* gflato at nanometrics <mailto:gflato at nanometrics.com> .com
<blocked::mailto:v at nanometrics.com> 

 


________________________________

	From: Technical Writer [mailto:tekwrytr at hotmail.com] 
	Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:52 AM
	To: Flato, Gillian; framers at lists.frameusers.com
	Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs
	
	

	The same could be said of pacemakers, missile control systems,
and a host of others. That does not change the fact that in most
software applications, perceptions of quality are highly subjective.
	
	
	

________________________________

		Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs
		Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:09:42 -0700
		From: gflato at nanometrics.com
		To: tekwrytr at hotmail.com; framers at lists.frameusers.com
		
		
		>>Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;
		>>Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is again
an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all cases.
		 
		When you work in the semi-conductor industry making
high-tech instruments that are used in fabs (chip fabrication plants),
quality is not subjective. If the tool stops running after a few
thousand cycles or a part on the tool fails after only a few months of
running, then it's objective. A part broke, the Tool shutdown, quality
is crap, that's not subjective.
		 
		TechWriters in my field document the software that runs
on these types of tools. If you go to a fab, you'll see the type of
tools I am taking about.
		 
		BTW, why don't you identify who you are? You act so
sanctimonious yet you hide behind a moniker. Have some cohones and tell
us who you are.
		 

		Thank you,

		 

		<mailto:gflato at nanometrics.com> 

		Gillian Flato

		Technical Writer (Software)

		nanometrics

		1550 Buckeye Dr. 

		Milpitas, CA. 95035

		(408.545.6316

		7  408.232.5911

		* gflato at nanometrics <mailto:gflato at nanometrics.com>
.com

		 


________________________________

			From: Technical Writer
[mailto:tekwrytr at hotmail.com] 
			Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:37 AM
			To: Flato, Gillian; framers at lists.frameusers.com
			Subject: RE: radical revamping of techpubs
			
			
			 
			And I know of a CEO who used to either get there
first, or let the wannabes struggle over the crumbs. Name of Bill Gates.
			 
			Quality is primarily a subjective opinion;
witness the 90+% of the population of the planet using Windows, despite
the occasional Blue Screen of Death, or necessary re-booting
orre-installing required. Similarly, whether a product is crap or not is
again an opinion, not an objective evaluation that can applied in all
cases. The Debian flavor of Linux is considered "the best" by some, and
"the worst" by some. The opinions are subjective.
			 
			Everyone TW wants to believe that he or she is
producing quality documentation that creates a warm fuzzy in the user,
and makes customers-for-life of the company that produces whatever is
being documented. I simply suggest a reality check may be more useful.
			 
			If the TW is documenting software, perhaps he or
she should change fields to one with a slower pace of life (and
writing). The option is to accept the realities of the marketplace, and
how those influence and constrain the production of technical
documentation. In a world in which dynamic onlne help files are rapidly
replacing hard copy documents, it seems more useful to focus on
developing a skill set that enables high-volume production of acceptable
quality content, rather than obsessing over trivial (to most users)
details of grammar, construction, or voice.
			 
			In that direction may lie the future of TW--get
it written, get it online, and concentrate on the Pareto principle of
satisfying the needs of the majority of users rather than obsessing over
the subjective opinions of the minority. 
			 
			 
			 
			
			< From: gflato at nanometrics.com
			> To: tekwrytr at hotmail.com;
framers at lists.frameusers.com
			> 
			> ...or similar biggies realize that
time-to-market is everything, 
			> 
			> Time-to-market is not everything if you
sacrifice quality. If you're first on the market but your product is
crap, the fact that you were first on the market is irrelevant. 
			> 
			> I know a CEO who got fired because all he
cared about is being first on the market but his products were crap and
failed often. Other company's that were slower to market but turned out
quality products, stole marketshare from that company. The company
almost went under until the board of Directors wisely fired him and put
a new CEO at the helm.
			> 
			> 
			> -Gillian
			> 
			> 
			
			
________________________________

			Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more!
Try Windows Live OneCare! Try now!
<http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hot
mailnews>  


________________________________

	Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows
Live OneCare! Try now!
<http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hot
mailnews>