Wanted: Comments on Auto FE Updater page

[Keith Wilby]

Folks

I am *not* a good technical writer. One of my many weaknesses.

Could folks who have recently used the Auto FE Updater read the page
at http://www.autofeupdater.com/gettingstarted.htm and make
suggestions as to how to reword the text?

Hi Tony, the text looks OK to me but I think what it lack is some
screenshots, maybe thumbnails that open large in another window?

Keith.

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Hi Tony, the text looks OK to me but I think what it lack is some
screenshots, maybe thumbnails that open large in another window?

Hmm, good point.

Along with some graphics illustrating what all happens with arrows and such.

Tony

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

You offering Tony paid
help is like me offering to give Paul McCartney song writing tips.

Well, actually I'm a decent coder and UI designer but I'm not that
good at user friendly technical writing.

Tony

 

[David W. Fenton]

I'm a decent coder and UI designer but I'm not that
good at user friendly technical writing.

I doubt that many of us are. I'm certainly not, simply because it's
so difficult to figure out what the user needs to know, as opposed
to what *I* know.

In the case of your utility, you're at least writing for the
moderately sophisticated, and users probably have some programming
experience, so you don't have to worry about creating a document
that the receptionist can understand!

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

I doubt that many of us are. I'm certainly not, simply because it's
so difficult to figure out what the user needs to know, as opposed
to what *I* know.
Exactly.

In the case of your utility, you're at least writing for the
moderately sophisticated, and users probably have some programming
experience, so you don't have to worry about creating a document
that the receptionist can understand!

Good point. That makes me feel a little better.

Tony

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

One thing that would be nice is an example of the folder layout for
multiple apps and the minimum network rights. I haven't distributed
multiple apps but my structure is like this
F:\AutoFE
\Exe
\Dev
\Production
\Desktop

In Exe I have your files. In Dev I place my app that I think is ready
for use. The Production folder contains the production app after the
client has looked at and approved the changes in Dev. Desktop contains
the icons for both Dev and Production. That seems to work well with one
app (but you might have a better, preferred layout). But what if one
has two or three apps they distribute? Besides the MDB in both Dev and
Production, what other files should be there as well?

Hmm, I see what you mean. Yes, a screen shot of some folder layouts
would make a lot of sesne.

I think you have CreateShortCutOnDesktop or
CreateShortCutOnCommonDesktop. It might seem obvious but I prefer it
spelled out or maybe a brief reason why.

I don't undersand what you are trying to say here. I need to explain
CreateShortCutOnDesktop or ???

Tony

 

[David W. Fenton]

What's the diff between Common and simply desktop? Let's say
there's folder Documentss and Setting.
All Users
User1
User2
I assume Common is All users and CreateShortCutOnDesktop is
specific for User1 or User2? When I'm installing things I like to
limit guessing and thinking. On the web page it states "Self
explanatory I hope. <smile>".
Yes and no. I guess if it stated something like "Common under
All
Users, Desktop to specific user" there is no ambivelence or
requirement to guess or think.

Tony is using pretty standard terminology there, seems to me.

In any event, doesn't it break to put a shortcut on the All Users
desktop in Vista and later?

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

I think stating that the files typically stored in the folder are the
MDB, icons, and the generated INI file. That all those files get copied
over.

Good point.

. What's the diff between Common and simply desktop? Let's say
there's folder Documentss and Setting.
All Users
User1
User2
I assume Common is All users and CreateShortCutOnDesktop is specific for
User1 or User2? When I'm installing things I like to limit guessing and
thinking. On the web page it states "Self explanatory I hope. <smile>".
Yes and no. I guess if it stated something like "Common under All
Users, Desktop to specific user" there is no ambivelence or requirement
to guess or think.

Ah, gotcha. Ok, thanks.

Maybe something more detail on FilePath as well. What happens if
somebody has Access in C:\ProgramFiles\Office\ and another has it in
C:\Office? IF a user has A2007 and A2003, do you recommend having an
icon for both? This is something as a developer you would know but is
something a user needs to test/debug before implementing system wide.

Actually I'd then recommend that the person use FileExtension rather than FilePath
but I do see what you mean.

When would anyone use Lockout=Yes?

You want to compact the backend or update the table structure. But yes I'll put that
in there.

If you put yourself in the shoes of a new user/installer and find a
sentence or two will clarify an issue, you're ahead of the game.

Trouble is I'm *exactly* not the end user. I have extreme difficulty putting myself
in those shoes. Which is why I *want* your comments.

This is simply my nitpik, nothing major. Love the end result.

Much appreciated. Both your comments and the kind words.

Tony

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Tony is using pretty standard terminology there, seems to me.

Yeah, but any questions anyone has I should be be making clearer so I do appreciate
Salad's comments.

In any event, doesn't it break to put a shortcut on the All Users
desktop in Vista and later?

Yes, and I have a message accordingly if the OS is Windows Vista or newer.

Tony

 

[David W. Fenton]

Trouble is I'm *exactly* not the end user.

Didn't you create the damned thing for your own use and only later
make it available to others? Your apps need it, so you're an
end-user of your own utility, so have the right perspective. You
just don't necessarily have the same perspective as users would
have, since you know *how* it works, not just what it does.

I think you're worrying overmuch. I've always thought your
documentation was perfectly fine. It's certainly far superior to the
vast majority of software documentation originating from the Linux
side of the pond.

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Didn't you create the damned thing for your own use and only later
make it available to others?

Yes. Although my client did pay me $500 for the first version that took me two
weeks to create in VB6.

I think you're worrying overmuch. I've always thought your
documentation was perfectly fine. It's certainly far superior to the
vast majority of software documentation originating from the Linux
side of the pond.

Ah, thanks. Never read Linux docs and have no plans for the immediate, near or
long term to start. <smile>

Tony

 

[Klatuu]

Isn't Linux that weird little dude in the Charlie Brown comic strip?

 

[David W. Fenton]

Ah, thanks. Never read Linux docs and have no plans for the
immediate, near or long term to start. <smile>

Well, you get dumped into "Linux documentation" any time you use an
Open Source software package, since that's where the vast majority
of them originate. Try the docs for Apache Server, for instance. It
might remind you of the old days of DOS software. And it's one of
the better ones, in fact.

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Isn't Linux that weird little dude in the Charlie Brown comic strip?

Hehehe

Tony