Help for Help files

 

Normally I like to write positive stuff and I really love Uxmatters.. it's a great site. BUT, the recent article PDF Manuals: The Wrong Paradigm for an Online Experience, from my perspective is pretty much everything that's wrong with Help today. Of course, I'd love to know what you think of my opinion.

 

Bad Help

The article is like bad help. It's too long. It's too dry. It has no narrative, and it's written for the kind of people that like to read manuals. I'll admit it, I'm one of them, but I'm aware I'm the small minority. The pictures are boring. It has no characters, story, or SEX to it. And it's text, text text. The lack of any comments [edit: some comments have now been added] on the article makes me question how many read the full thing.

A Cultural Heritage

Meet Rupert. Rupert is computer programmer and writes Help files for Automated Teacups Inc. Rupert loves to read long bits of text. When he's looking for something, he clearly knows what it is he is searching for, and how to describe it in a text form. His mind can unravel trees structures, and disclosure-triangle based maps with ease.. in fact he finds it easy to remember large maps of where stuff is in his head. He also doesn't mind jumping around between chunks of text, because he always knows how to get back to where he was due to this innate and learned ability. 

 

It is these skills which lead him, and those like him into the computer industry in the first place. And inside this environment, these particular skills have strengthened. 

 



Rupert doesn't understand why people simply don't READ what he WROTE! Pictures don't excite him as much as text. He choses usage examples like computer hardware or servers. His Help documents wouldn't ever use "favourite puppy database" as an example.

Rupert has done a wonderful job. Without these minds, computers would never have got created and optimized in the first place. Now it's time for the next step, to optimize for 'average' humans.

"HELP" should, and could be...

 

• Somewhat wiki-like


• Searchable images and video. With actual people in it


• Entertaining to browse.. to find out things you didn't know you were looking for


• Much more integrated with the application itself* 


• Text-chat enabled


• Easy to keep above all other apps


• Easy to subscribe to


• Vastly easier for the creator to update, even if video/image heavy

I'm sorry Mike, but your article is dangerous, because it instills a feeling that Help is "almost there". It's not. 

 

* The earlier Mac OS's Help would draw a thick red pen around the buttons you needed to click when explaining a particular topic

[NOTE: oops, comments were off. Now back on. :-) ]

 

Comments

[Keith Lang]

Window management on the whole seems to be a big problem for the non-geek user.

Windows dissapear under others as the users try to move something from one to the other, or see both at the same time.. sounds like a post is required.

[Michael Hughes]

See my response in full at: http://user-assistance.blogspot.com/2008/11/will-write-for-metamucil.html

[David Farbey]

I don't think that every application and every user fits into the paradigm of friendly applications and chatty help that you seem to have in mind. Most business applications certainly don't, and most business managers would regard "wiki-like" help systems as a distracting drain on productivity.

Do you have any evidence to support your assertion that help should be "Entertaining to browse.. to find out things you didn’t know you were looking for"? Isn't it the case that people who use help want to find a very quick answer to a very specific question for the application problem they are facing at that moment?

[UI and us » Blog Archive]

[...] Will Wright’s excellent rebuttal titled Will Write for Metamucil, in which he commented on my previous post commenting on his original post. In no was I attacking Will or the excellent work he’s [...]

[Patrick]

Personally, I think that both this article and the one it critiqued raise valid points. Most importantly, both highlight the fact that the online model is far different from the print model and that documentation needs to shift its emphasis from older delivery methods. That said, just because technology offers neat bells and whistles doesn't mean that they should always be used. You have to keep the audience in mind and that can change from one application to the next. When I worked for a telephony company writing manuals for technicians who worked in the field out of vans without laptops, printed documentation was a necessity so that was the model we followed. Docs for a web app, on the other hand, should incorporate whatever technological tools best suit the users who'll be reading said docs. Not sure that either author is "right" or "wrong" on this as some docs could use a video or two while others don't. My three cents.