Well, I'd agree with the comments about the non-functioning search, but the real point I'm trying to make is about Usability.

In another life I wrote technical documentation for software manufacturers, and I've also been the manager for a large government computer centre. In both these gigs I would estimate that 90% of the gripes came from people reading documentation but not understanding it. Put another way; what we wrote reflected our universe, but the readers inhabited another universe that barely intersected ours.

Case in point -- anyone who has used 'home' editions of Windows just fires up the computer and gets the Welcome screen. They may have to choose between user names James and Josephine, but that's it for logging in. But get one of these 'experienced' users on a domain and they have to press Ctrl - Alt - Del to start the Login process. The simultaneous three-key-press is so foreign to these user's experience set that Microsoft have to have a pop-up diagram to aid users if they flub it, because this is such an atypical task to perform on a keyboard. Even so, about 25% of our help desk calls were from people who, until we sent someone to actually 'do' the key-press in front of them, simply didn't 'get' it.

In my present position as CEO of a Healthcare provider I have to ensure that healthcare professionals enjoy using our IT systems, can rely on them rather than lebenty-leben Post-It Notes stuck around the screen bezel, and don't feel that the IT infrastructure is 'getting in the way' of them meeting patient's needs.

To do this we run extensive Usability sessions in the design, construction and delivery phases of our IT systems. As our gold standard we use the Internet Banking processes of some major banks (because nothing steams people more than feeling that an IT system is getting between them and their money). In general, these systems work well because:

• the data input occurs in a logical order from the customer's perspective,
• there is a separate screen for each logical sub-task,
• previously entered data is offered as a choice if it is relevant,
• the customer's details are pre-populated wherever it makes sense,
• the screen contains helpful hints for each field, often with examples,
• dates, times and other coded information can be selected from 'picker' boxes such as calendars, lists, etc.,
• there are consistency checks for each screen and for the total entry, along with 'back' and 'forward' buttons to enable easy review,
• the penultimate screen summarizes what the customer is trying to do and lists the consequences if the 'submit' button is pressed,
• after 'submitting', the system offers the customer the chance to print/save the transaction, both immediately or at any time in the future.

That's good design. Makes no assumptions, Your World Is My World.

The 'chatter' about problem / version / OS / other products arises because the FrameMaker Forum users (and, I'm betting many users in other Adobe Forums) are not 'getting' the Forum structure. No good snarking about dumb users, just make it work the way users want it to. If each Forum post contains the problem / version / OS / other products info in a structured form, then searches (when they work) will become much more relevant -- which is what we all want to achieve in the first place.

+++

PS -- I see that the Forum spelling checker software doesn't recognize FrameMaker -- but offers up Fragmental & Rainmaker...