Goto Blog Home PageRevell Research Systems: Alastair Revell's Web Log
On this page....
Archive
<October 2008>
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
2829301234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930311
2345678

RSS 2.0     Atom 1.0     CDF

Summary
Search
Navigation
Categories
Blog Roll
About Alastair Revell
Alastair Revell is the Managing Consultant of Revell Research Systems, a Management and Technology Consulting Practice based at Exeter in the United Kingdom.
Contact Alastair Revell
 EMail Alastair Revell Email Me
Copyright
Legal & Other Notices
Sign In
Disclaimer
The material published in this web log is for general purposes only. It does not constitute nor is it intended to represent professional advice. You should always seek specific professional advice in relation to particular issues. The information in this web log is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights. The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions.

Web Log Home | Welcome to this Web Log | Using this Web Log | New to Blogs? | About Revell Research Systems | Contact Details

Review Entries for Day Saturday, October 21, 2006

I am becoming increasingly frustrated by the lack of technical documentation produced by software producers, particularly concerning the use of the file system and registry.

I am sure that it would not take too much effort to provide details about the folder structures used by an application and the registry keys it accesses and stores (and what their relevance is).

In environments that are locked down according to best practice, having access to this information is invaluable. It can help in determining what security rights need to be given to certain folders and registry keys, without having to resort to tools like RegMon and FileMon.

I'm also irritated by how many software producers dictate where they will store their information, without offering any alternatives.

For instance, it seems that Microsoft ActiveSync 4.2 insists on a set location for a user's file synchronisation folder, which ActiveSync 3.8 at least allowed to be changed (albeit by a poorly documented registry hack). Certainly, there doesn't appear to be any documentation on the latest version's configuration. There is no apparent key-by-key description of its registry entries, stipulating the meaning of each and the security permissions it requires.

Another example is that some versions of Hewlett Packard's scanner software seem to dictate where they will deposit scans, which is less than ideal in a corporate environment.

A further example is the Olympus digital dictation system, which suffers from very poor technical documentation and also seems very inflexible about where and how it will store its files.

Good technical documentation would save many systems engineers hours of painstaking analysis and would simply be implementing best practice from the developer's perspective. I'm wondering whether this documentation even exists in rudimentary form outside of the source code of these tools (and even then I wonder whether the developers will have documented them inside the source).

We should really expect higher quality from our software producers...

More about Alastair Revell

Saturday, October 21, 2006 11:53:25 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)  #
Comments [0] General | Trackback

RSS 2.0 Feed If you enjoyed reading an article on this blog, why not subscribe to the RSS 2.0 feed to receive future articles?
   
Revell Research Systems Logo Visit the Revell Research Systems Web Site if you want to learn more about this management and technology consulting practice.