Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!bmc.uu.se!kuling!bqt
From: bqt@cia (Johnny Billquist)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: 48SX ROM Versions & SYSEVALs
Message-ID: <1571@kuling.UUCP>
Date: 1 Jul 90 19:10:04 GMT
References: <6236@helios.TAMU.EDU> <42507@apple.Apple.COM> <6261@helios.TAMU.EDU>
Sender: news@kuling.UUCP
Reply-To: bqt@cia (Johnny Billquist)
Organization: dvl
Lines: 61
In-reply-to: n023el@tamunix (Robert Ellis)
Posting-Front-End: Gnews 2.0

In article <6261@helios.TAMU.EDU>, n023el@tamunix (Robert Ellis) writes:
>[lost of stuff deleted...]
>The point of concern I was addressing was the seemingly unethical practice
>of allowing design team members who are priviledged to inside information
>to profit from the sell of after market user reference guides which they
>write. 
>
>Why were their efforts not fully utilized during the time when the 48's
>accompanying reference material was undergoing preperation?

They could have, with the result of a later release of the machine,
and for more $$$, since manuals don't come for free either.

>You will have to admit that the reference material with which the 48SX
>comes is poorly indexed, and inundated with mistakes. One might go so
>far as to say Hewlett-Packard is unwittingly encouraging carelessness
>in this area by allowing employees to publish. 

The case of bad manuals (if that's the case (I don't own a 48 myself))
is sad, but not uncommon. However, the line between bad and good manuals
also depend on what you want from the manual. The normal user, and a
hacker definitely don't want the same things in a manual, and the hardware
hacker want still something else.

>The bottom line is that the need for after market support material could
>have been completely unnecessary had Hewlett-Packard taken the time and
>care to do it right. 

Not true. There always rise a demand for more info as time goes by.
You can never put everything in the first manual, as many things that
people want to know come appearant only after years of use. And even
the manuals that HP produce isn't always good enough, since they have
certain policys about what to publish, which doesn't bind other
people. What I'm thinking of can be exemplified by the synthetic
programming techniques on the HP-41. HP never wrote any official
manuals on that, but many other people did, including Bill Wickes
(I'm not sure about the spelling, but he is on this newsgroup),
who later became an HP emplyee.

The fact is that HP might not feel it worth putting the money into
writing all those manuals either, since they might feel that they
won't get the money they put into the effort paid back.

There might be a lot of resons why HP choose not to publish stuff.
But I'm glad that they allow their employees to publish such stuff
anyway. If those employees want to put their effort, time and
knowledge to that use, why not? It benefits the users, not HP.
And, those who write those manuals. I sure don't mind if they make
money on it. Why do you think they will do it? Partially for the
money, certainly. (At least I would).

======================================================================
Everybody know that the DECstation	- I'm on a bus
is a pdp8, which is a RISC, but		- on a psychodelic trip,
where did MIPS computers get into it?	- reading murder books
					- and tryin' to stay hip.

	- Johnny Billquist		- Billy Idol

D89.JOHNNY-BILLQUIST@CARMEN.DOCS.UU.SE
======================================================================