Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion
Releases and website behaviour...
Llorean:
The documentation section of the bar on the left side of every page, everywhere seems good enough to me. That's the one I was referring to. I probably should've been clearer.
bluebrother:
--- Quote from: shotofadds on July 07, 2008, 01:47:26 PM ---..which is fine, except the current front page text doesn't explicitly ferry people anywhere at all. I think an equally likely scenario (if not more so) is "Front Page -> Releases -> "oh..." -> Current Build -> Click the pretty picture of my player -> "oh.. what do I do with this .zip?"
--- End quote ---
Before clicking the pretty picture of the player one might find a link at the top of that page ;) But of course a new user might not know what's this "Rockbox Utility" and simply ignore it. Maybe making that link more self-explanatory would be helpful ...
pondlife:
Whilst we might wish users to start with the manual, I fear that many people will just head for anything vaguely labelled "download" or "install". Even if we explicitly tell them to read the manual first, a fair few will carry on looking for a download/install link, or simply give up.
Certainly, I know I'm a member of the "if all else fails, read the instructions" club. It's often easier to understand a manual if you're already playing with the kit, even if the manual is as good as the Rockbox one.
A seperate quick start guide/page/extract would be fine , but I'd hope that RBUtil is now mature (and simple) enough to be linked to directly as a quick-starter. (If it is not, maybe we should aim to make it so.)
pondlife
Llorean:
Do we care if they simply give up?
What's wrong with putting together an install guide, and putting the link to the installer in it, after directions?
Edit to clarify: I personally have a preference for saying "I'd rather they give up, then create an increased support load by willingly ignoring instructions". I think there's a group of people who are problem users, and it's a bad idea to encourage them. If they'll still skip to the end anyway, that's fine. But having the install instructions before it at least encourages people to read the docs, rather than discouraging them from doing so.
Edit again to summarize: I think asking people to read the docs, with the installer in them is vastly preferable in terms of likely success rate and generated support load to saying "here's a link to the installer, good luck" and hoping they're clever enough to choose to go back to the instructions if they have trouble, rather than messing things up or pestering people about things that are documented.
No matter how foolproof you try to make an installer, it'll never be perfect, and it's better to at least wave the documentation in front of someone first, even if they scroll straight past it to the link, because then SOME of them will at least know the documentation was there.
Zardoz:
--- Quote from: GodEater on July 07, 2008, 01:19:54 PM ---
--- Quote from: Llorean on July 07, 2008, 12:26:27 PM ---Many softwares have a separate install guide.
--- End quote ---
Is there anything stopping us turning the Installation chapter in the manual into a seperate guide we could offer as well?
I'd still leave that section in the normal manual too - but it might be nice to have a "quick start" method for people ?
--- Quote from: Zardoz on July 07, 2008, 01:19:18 PM ---I'm not a developer needless to remark (in fact I might be Lloreans nemesis.) I'm more than willing to contribute to a reworking of the manual (I've spotted many grammatical and spelling mistakes, and I think I could be clearer in more basic English.
--- End quote ---
Start submitting patches then.
--- End quote ---
Ok I will. How do I do that? Do the patches have to be in a certain format?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version