Yea, me too.

IBM's manuals have always been - pathetic.
You may say they are similar to Microsofts Manuals:
 Full of facts but say absolutely nothing.

I have been complaining for years about their manuals. They are hard to
follow and are always out of date.

And how about IBM support, when you say:
 "I was folloing the manual..."
and they say:
 "Ah, yea. Well, the manual is not quite right. Here is how it really
works..."

I get that ALL the time - annonying as hell!

*** Van ***

 ----------
From:  Dist. Stor. ManagerADSM List[SMTP:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU]
Sent:  Wednesday, April 24, 1996 9:11 AM
To:  Multiple recipients of list ADS
Subject:  Re: Acceptance (Was support ADSM)

In-Reply-To:  <9604241107.AA0063 AT PEPS1.rockefeller DOT edu>

On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Jeffrey Mathers wrote:

| For what it's worth you can add my name to this litany about the
pathetic
| documentation. In a way its nice to hear that all platforms are treated
| equally badly. I though this was just IBM dropping the ball on OS/2
| products again.

| Promises of Redbooks do not change my opinion, unless they are provided
| at no cost.

All the books are good for is reference.  They're useless for showing
conecpts and sturcture.  We need some basic inllustrations on how things
are setup instead of digging through documentation at least twice to
figure out what is going on.  I have the red books, but they're more like
advanced topics and stuff.

Even the installation manual itself is vague and poorly structured.
 There
are so many pieces in between that are missing that you have to dig up.
___________________________________________________________
Joe Morris - morris AT unc DOT edu - http://sunsite.unc.edu/morris
OIT/Computing Systems, Development
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill