RE: Documenting installers?

Subject: RE: Documenting installers?
From: Maritza van den Heuvel <MaritzaV -at- stt-global -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 10:39:11 +0200


Maritza: I initially though that documenting an installer to the hilt was
wasting time. However, the two products I document are primarily for use in
large corporate environments where a locked-down network environment is
generally the norm. Because of this, and many other requests from our
existing client base for various auto-installation options and auto-update
facilities for user bases that may range from a few tens to a few thousands
at a go, I document the one installer to the hilt from

1) These are all the applications
2) This is what they do
3) These are the people in your organisation who need them
4) These are the different ways you can install/update
5) Here are a few things you need to know about databases and security
before you begin
6) These are the two available installers
7) Here's a step-by-step for each installer ...

It may sound like overkill, but we have had very few support calls on this
installation guide - and that's what it's all about, after all?

***
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Jennings [mailto:BrianJennings -at- cougarmtn -dot- com]
Sent: 20 May 2004 06:47
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: RE: Documenting installers?



<<So your installation instructions can be as follows:
1. Things you need to know or do before installing
2. Options to think about before you run the installer.
3. Put away the manual and run the installer.>>

In principle I completely agree. However, in my case I am documenting an
install of a product that can be networked and while this scenerio works
perfectly for that, it does not work as well for the network installation.

Still, even on the network install I only need to include instructions on
parts of the process but it seems that once I comment on any part of the
install process the user then gets antsy and insecure if other parts are not
documented. Maybe it's a matter of trust. If I must provide external
documentation on any part of the install, then the user must wonder about
the rest. I.e. if they can't trust what they see on the screen for
everything they need to know in one section of the install, how can they
trust the rest. It seems an assurance issue more than anything.

Brian

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

SEE THE ALL NEW ROBOHELP X5 IN ACTION: RoboHelp X5 is a giant leap forward
in Help authoring technology, featuring Word 2003 support, Content
Management, Multi-Author support, PDF and XML support and much more! http://www.macromedia.com/go/techwrldemo

>From a single set of Word documents, create online Help and printed
documentation with ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 7 Professional, a new yearly
subscription service offering free updates and upgrades, support, and more.
http://www.doctohelp.com

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



Previous by Author: RE: translation tool question
Next by Author: Re: As long as we're talking about "My Style" in Word ...
Previous by Thread: RE: Documenting installers?
Next by Thread: Documenting installers?


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


Sponsored Ads