A well known acronym amongst programmers is RTFM (Read The F**king Manual), it’s a common response given to a users question that can easily be answered by reading the manual. It’s also great way to deflect any real or perceived problem with your software.
In 12 years of programming, I have never been able to engage directly with what users think about my applications to the level that the iTunes store allows, be it reviews or emails. That said, only a fraction of of users ever email me with a problem (less than 0.1%) and others just leave a 1 star review & I am none the wiser as to how I can fix what went wrong (developers can not respond to reviews in iTunes). Many programmers now demand face to face meetings with end users in the corporate IT world, hence the Agile Manifesto.
Users have wised up to the RTFM answer. As one person politely stated to me at the end of a several email exchange – “No, I will not read your manual”.
Thanks to the iPhone’s ease of use there’s an expectation that all software should be so intuitive that it defies the need for any manual. O’Reilly disagree and in fact publish a manual for the iPhone, aptly named ‘iPhone: The Missing Manual‘. It’s very popular.
Unfortunately todays programers are paying for the sins of the past whilst committing them all over again. Yes, a good deal of manuals are terrible and others indecipherable. Everyone remembers starting to write a letter in Microsoft Word and having an animated character butting in saying – “It looks like you are writing a letter. Would you like me to…irrelevant option 1, random option 2″. Um…no, I want to write my $%^&$* letter!
The ‘Dummies’ guides have gone a long way in successfully helping users. A good user focused technical writer on a IT project can save you a fortune on support and help drive adoption of new systems. I like to believe things have changed for the better.
So how did I respond to someone saying they would not read my manual? Ultimately it’s a self defeating prerogative. If one holds such a reverent belief that all things should be so easy as to not require a manual, how would you ever learn Adobe PhotoShop? Or any other elegant yet feature packed piece of software? It also over looks the fact that people learn things in different ways, some like to read, others a video or by example.
RTFM is no excuse for not having a well thought out, coded & polished design with good usability placed squarely in the centre. And it’s also no excuse for really listening to what users tell you. I detest programmers that do use ‘read the manual’ as way to fob users off because they are nothing more than a distraction. However, having a manual and directing users to this when getting into advanced options or explaining the buried complexity of particular feature or simply how something works doesn’t mean your software is immediately ‘unintuitive’.
More than 2,500 users a month read the guides I have written for Tube Deluxe & London Bus and I am always improving them. So…how about it? Lets RTFM together 
Being recently involved in user acceptance testing and the results it is definitely a mindset. Some people just get it, while others create doubt over the application design simply by stumbling through the user interface getting lost at every corner they turn. The analogy is no different to drivers. Without any form of a guide, some can work their way home from anywhere; whilst others find it “much more challenging”.
We recently won the battle to remove our online help documentation whist making subtle changes to help lead a user down the right path. The main goal was not to surprise the user under any circumstance. The real problem we found is that “users don’t read anything”. This is like driving without reading signs. Inevitably there are going to be “mistakes along the way”.
You can compare applications to vehicles. Most people are going to “jump in and drive”. Obviously that is not possible for everything but then you are probably not catering for everyone.
One day there might even be a standard form of a “SAT nav” for an application. Choose your goal and get direction along the way.
There will always be a place for help and assistance for more advanced concepts but the traditional methods may no longer be valid. If a level of complication is required then make assistance searchable using local and online resources and social networking.
I rarely read the manual first.
I can certainly vouch for users not reading anything, you can see this in reviews on the app store aplenty. But to be fair it’s many of us that don’t read. I had a particular privilege of working with a very talented programmer who would analyse an error code to the point where I would feel pain (he was my boss). I’m like, come on this is the problem here, just change this. He would out solve it well before I did. I definitely learnt a lesson.
As for removing online help? Now that is a novel approach. I guess one of the fundamental problems with help is that it’s never in context. You can structure it around ‘task orientation’ as much as you like; but users will always come at it from a preconceived goal – “I want to do this, why does this ‘help’ not immediately tell me how to do that?”.
What I am finding is that as the user base increases, some users expect the app to work a certain way, a way that I had not originally intended. So it’s labeled as ‘unintuitive’ from their frame of reference. That’s fine, no problem…lets start a dialogue so I can understand what it is that you would like it to different or better. Here comes the ‘but’; in order for us to have this dialogue I need you to understand intimately how it works now, this means reading the help & using all aspects of the application over a number of scenarios. One piece of feed back received suggested that the ‘Track Me’ button be removed and be replaced with ‘Add Favourite’ and in fact ‘Track Me’ was point less. Track Me is one of the most popular features.
Generally, I think Bus delivers 80% of the functionality that people want out of a journey planning application for London. Of course there is always room for improvement and version 2.1 will definitely not be the last.