Live data from Hacker News

On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

caseyliss.com

61–70 of 348 posts

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#61

I've been a technical writer for ~8 years (3 at a startup, 5 at Gooble). I don't know Apple's situation but here's my guess: > Is the documentation team too small? (Likely.) Documentation is weird because there seems to be widespread agreement among developers about how lacking it is (and conversely I think it's safe to say how important it is for job success) yet technical writing is almost always understaffed, no m…

> technical writing is almost always understaffed > it's really hard to show a causal link between the docs we create and developer success

Amen to that. IMO good documentation is incredibly valuable, but not in a way that aligns with business priorities. At my current job, we hear, repeatedly, that our documentation is poor, and that we need to improve it. Execs echo this sentiment, but the status quo doesn't budge.

Internally, we have about a 10:1 engineer:tech writer ratio (in a small-ish org--I assume the gap is even wider in larger orgs), and the writers are all generalists, covering every product from top to bottom. In practice, this means that engineers are asked to draft the bulk of documentation, and the writers scramble to at least copy-edit it.

Engineer-drafted documentation often isn't great, unfortunately, for several key reasons:

- Writing software is very different from using software. Engineers often don't use their own products, and writing about something you don't actually do is hard.

- It's very easy to omit details that are important for novices when you are an expert. Engineers usually have a great deal of knowledge about their own software in their brain already, because they wrote it, and cannot magically forget everything they know when asked to write documentation for someone who doesn't have that knowledge already.

- Writing effective, clear prose is hard, especially when writing about complex technical subjects for an audience with varying skill levels. Engineers don't spend the bulk of their time writing prose, and it's often not their strongest skill.

Personally, I have a mix of both skillsets because of a weird career path, but while I actually like writing documentation and am arguably better at it than writing software, there's no good reason to pursue that path: I can easily get double the salary in an engineering position as I can in a writing position, despite being a rather mediocre engineer. So I do software engineering :shrug:

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#62
post #53
post #7

Has anyone else noticed that Apple has been slowly moving away from the long-form guides that were helpful at explaining core concepts? I remember once seeing a comprehensive guide on code signing, but over the years it appears to have been scrubbed from their documentation resources. In its place is a much less helpful (but prettier-looking) guide. In comparison, I've noticed Android has FANTASTIC developer document…

Yes! Apple used to have Technical Notes that were a deep dive into how the OS is implemented. They were super helpful in troubleshooting and optimizing for Mac OS. They haven't published anything like this in over a decade. I suspect someone took "hiding implementation details" too seriously, and now Apple never talks about how anything works (it's all magic). You only get function's signature, and "documentation" th…

There are good reasons to hide the implementation details in documentation. The primary being it’s easier to keep the documentation up to date, our primary topic here. Many languages even publish class interfaces but not necessarily implementation details.

That said, a couple of example code snippets on using the interface wouldn’t hurt.

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#63
post #60
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft has put lots of effort into their docs in the past couple years, and it's pretty great. Under the "Version" dropdown you can flip to see the same docs in a specific version or platform (Framework vs Core), and this is pretty helpful for porting/upgrading code, as well as coming from a Google search or Stack Overflow link -- you can easily get to the docs for the version you're working with. The other great…

Is there an offline version of that documentation? One of the best things about Java is that you can install the documentation package (depending on your distribution, it's something like java-11-openjdk-javadoc) and the source code package (something like java-11-openjdk-src), and have an offline copy of the full documentation which you can open directly in your web browser and IDE.

Looks like with Visual Studio installation this should work? - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/teamblog/offline-book-refre...

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#64
post #53
post #7

Has anyone else noticed that Apple has been slowly moving away from the long-form guides that were helpful at explaining core concepts? I remember once seeing a comprehensive guide on code signing, but over the years it appears to have been scrubbed from their documentation resources. In its place is a much less helpful (but prettier-looking) guide. In comparison, I've noticed Android has FANTASTIC developer document…

Yes! Apple used to have Technical Notes that were a deep dive into how the OS is implemented. They were super helpful in troubleshooting and optimizing for Mac OS. They haven't published anything like this in over a decade. I suspect someone took "hiding implementation details" too seriously, and now Apple never talks about how anything works (it's all magic). You only get function's signature, and "documentation" th…

The other day someone referenced this post by an Apple engineer:

https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/663858

Why in the world is this a random undiscoverable post in the (terribly designed) developer discussion forums rather than a Technical Note in the documentation? It would have been a TN in the past. In fact that same engineer wrote a number of old Apple TNs.

It's clear even to some within Apple that there's a need for more and better documentation, but some pointy haired boss in upper management seems to think the current situation is fine.

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#66
post #28
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is they’re realized documentation is a huge cost center and even their own technical writers are overburdened by the churn of deprecating APIs and changing best practices. It’s worse then the JavaScript community.

I find this business decision fascinating because a good portion of their App Store revenue comes from developers. One would THINK developer relations would be a priority at Apple, but it's pretty clear that's not the case. It was one of things that I found unbelievable when switching from Android to iOS development. The developer experience is just so much WORSE on iOS. Sometimes, it's as if Apple is actively trying…

They have such a strong market presence and so much power, they don't have to care for the moment because developers will come to the platform anyway.

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#67

This isn't an apple thing. Its industry wide. Much of the good documentation that exists is stuff that was written 20+ years ago by actual technical writers and is still being maintained. AKA the windows API/etc documentation, linux man pages, etc. The vast majority of modern documentation is worthless autogenerated garbage when it exists. It lacks good examples, meaningful overviews and functional diagrams. In many…

Did you ever look at the Windows API documentation?

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#68
post #32

I've been a technical writer for ~8 years (3 at a startup, 5 at Gooble). I don't know Apple's situation but here's my guess: > Is the documentation team too small? (Likely.) Documentation is weird because there seems to be widespread agreement among developers about how lacking it is (and conversely I think it's safe to say how important it is for job success) yet technical writing is almost always understaffed, no m…

> I know it seems silly but that's why I've been advocating for getting those little "was this page helpful?" links at the bottom of pages, followed by an opportunity to provide freeform feedback. Whilst this is great, I think most people perceive documentation differently. Rarely does documentation delight me in the sense that I'd leave feedback. Generally, my interaction with documentation is one of "It works as ex…

Yup I know it's a tall order / unrealistic but I'm just trying to provide context as to why documentation might be systematically underfunded (lack of causal chain proving its value). Your response is totally understandable but it also demonstrates why the situation probably won't change any time soon.

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#69

I’ve been picking at SwiftUI recently and run into this myself. You want to know how something works or how to use it, so you go to Apple’s documentation. “Here’s the type signature, have fun!” Thanks. But I was hoping something more than what Xcode’s autocomplete already filled in for me. So instead you end up on 3rd party tutorials (special thanks to John Sundell and Paul Hudson) and always looking at dates on Medi…

I wholeheartedly agree. The documentation is sparse and 3rd party tutorials have to be recent. That's why I still hold back for adoption.

Paul Hudson has really good material but I wish I could just leave a tab open with the official documentation and be prepared for most challenges. OTOH, things like Core Audio where never really well documented.

For learning Swift I recommend https://www.swiftforgood.com, no affiliation (also there Paul Hudson wrote the chapter about SwiftUI).

Re: On Apple's Piss-Poor Documentation

#70

I’ve been picking at SwiftUI recently and run into this myself. You want to know how something works or how to use it, so you go to Apple’s documentation. “Here’s the type signature, have fun!” Thanks. But I was hoping something more than what Xcode’s autocomplete already filled in for me. So instead you end up on 3rd party tutorials (special thanks to John Sundell and Paul Hudson) and always looking at dates on Medi…

> and always looking at dates on Medium posts

While I'm not an iOS dev I have seen a trend where people have stopped putting in dates of their coding tutorials.

Post reply on HN