Re: annoying documentation in 6 (rant)
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg79082] Re: annoying documentation in 6 (rant)
- From: AES <siegman at stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:54:47 -0400 (EDT)
- Organization: Stanford University
- References: <f77j9r$c9p$1@smc.vnet.net> <19356212.1184479716385.JavaMail.root@m35> <f7f34s$od7$1@smc.vnet.net> <f7hrqb$s2i$1@smc.vnet.net>
In article <f7hrqb$s2i$1 at smc.vnet.net>, David Bailey <dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk> wrote: > > Seriously, though, without a book for 6.0, the help topics > absolutely must be authoritative and complete. > I think all of us who've posted earlier on this topic would fully agree with you that for something as complex, massive, and extensively changed as 6.0, the Help system absolutely must be "authoritative and complete" **with or without a book**. But while agreeing with this, some of us are focusing on a different but equally valid point, namely that in this situation an authoritative and complete Help system is not in any way a substitute for an equally badly needed, very much briefer and less detailed, introductory or overview book, manual, or introductory document of some kind that is available on, or can be put onto, paper. I'm appalled that Wolfram failed to meet -- or apparently even to recognize? -- this obvious need. A discouraging departure from their usually very high standards, and a situation that IMHO actually does serious damage to a product that has had so much high-quality effort put into developing the product itself. I would not recommend to any student, colleague, or professional acquaintance that they invest in acquiring or attempting to learn 6.0 until this lack is met.