Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cwjcc!gatech!udel!burdvax!dave
From: dave@PRC.Unisys.COM (David Lee Matuszek)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Comments on S.U.M. 1.1 (long)
Message-ID: <11274@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM>
Date: 28 Aug 89 19:08:23 GMT
References: <11238@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM> <10667@fluke.COM>
Sender: news@PRC.Unisys.COM
Organization: Unisys Corporation, Paoli Research Center; Paoli, PA
Lines: 59

In article <10667@fluke.COM> moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer) writes:
>Some added comments and information...

[Re my long article flaming S.U.M. 1.1]

I wrote:

>>The manual is obviously written for "the rest of them."  I understand
>>and appreciate the value of such an approach, but in this case the
>>manual carefully rations out not quite enough information to actually
>>use the program.

Jeff replied (in part):

>My general impression is that you'd like more detailed, technical
>information from SUM about what's going on than is currently provided.  I
>can understand the sentiments, though they aren't mine, but I would suspect
>that the majority of the people using it -- your average Mac user who uses
>the Mac to perform a task, and doesn't want to be bothered with the
>technical details -- don't share them.  They just want to have the disk
>protected, and hang the technical details.

You are right in that I do rather like to know what's going on behind
the scenes; I have always found that mechanisms (in the most general
possible sense) work better and last longer if I know something about
how they work.

However, I bought S.U.M. because I "just want to have the disk
protected."  In my case, at least, the documentation was out-and-out
inadequate.  Following the manual DIDN'T WORK.  It didn't seem to me
that my case was particularly unusual (20 Meg badly fragmented hard
disk).  I think I got S.U.M.  going correctly, but it required drawing
on my (rather shaky) previous knowledge.  My complaint was
specifically that the information provided was inadequate for (what I
considered to be) normal use of the program.

I suggested a technical appendix, rather than putting more technical
information into the body of the text, because I agree with you about
average Mac users--such as I am myself, when things work right.

>My general sentiments are that Symantec has once again taken a hard look at
>what they did wrong in their previous version and rectified it in an
>upgrade.  The addition of the backup package in SUM II doesn't interest me
>too much, but I can understand the appeal of it to the first-time purchaser,
>as an "One-Stop-Shopping" hard disk maintenance kit.  As I've said before,
>I'm very impressed with this company.

I am very impressed with other parts of the company.

>You will get a free upgrade.  You'll probably need to mail in a copy of your
>dated receipt to prove purchase date, but that's about it.

I sent in my warranty card, and I hope to hear from them....I would
really like to report that SUM II answer my complaints.

-- Dave Matuszek (dave@prc.unisys.com)
-- Unisys Corp. / Paoli Research Center / PO Box 517 / Paoli PA  19301
-- Any resemblance between my opinions and those of my employer is improbable.
* 20th anniversary?  Yeah, but it's 17 years since the LAST man on the moon! *