FAQ needs to be in the WIKI
Mabye included with the DosBox distribution in a FAQ file?

Thread cleanup. Topic title changed.

I have a new faq standing ready, just added a few game topics and fixed some Q&A's on DOSBox crashes.

Thanks for the cleanup.

Erik.

I changed the link in my signature from my old puny FAQ thread to this one. 😀

Any thoughts on including the FAQ with the next official release of DosBox?

Would it even be read by anyone that doesn't already know how to use DOSBox?

It can't hurt to include it. But, maybe it is too difficult for some people to "read the README file in the DOSBox directory". The kind of people that don't even know where that DOSBox directory is.

What they do know and understand is an URL.

So I suggest to replace that text with something like: "For more information go to http://www.dosbox.com/ ".

The first-read page should be very short, just a list of 4-5 other pages to visit:

1) Read Me
2) Intro to DOSBox commands
3) DOSBox Wiki
4) DOSBox FAQ
5) Authors, Copying, News, Install, ZMBC Read ME

You could remove any links to the forums from the homepage and include it in one of the above links. They would have to at least browse through the documentation to find it.

DOSBox could detect a first start and show the readme/FAQ on boot.

Erik.

Such detection requires registry writing, or modifying the config-file or something...

This can be done by creating a simple "options" file and just check if this file exists. But this flies out of the window with Vista's Program Files ...

Anyways can be done, but is it worth the trouble?

Erik.

MiniMax wrote:

Such detection requires registry writing, or modifying the config-file or something...

Config file idea sounds good.

IIGS_User wrote:

MiniMax wrote:

Such detection requires registry writing, or modifying the config-file or something...

Config file idea sounds good.

Nah, no matter how much info and READ THIS FIRST you smack into users' faces, some of them will never read it and ask on the forums anyway. The remaining 1% will silently look it up anyway.

Besides, dosbox with a frontend is pretty easy to use by itself, most questins arise only after having set up a game and finding out it works so-damn-slooooow it makes you want to spam the forums.

In other words, I'm against it, since things like that tend to evolve into tip-of-the-day windows at startup. And these things keep you another click away from what you want to do.

Keep it simple, a MOTD file with some info on where to look for help will suffice. Maybe a default autoexec with something like 'type MOTD' at the end..

<irony>Thanks for your genius insight, the_bob. With 1 post on VOGONS, you're a DOSBox support specialist for sure.</irony>

We all know about the "users not reading docs"-effect, but i think it would make sense to include the FAQ with a DOSBox install. I mean, the info is here, so why not give it to the users? We will never know for sure how many users actually look at the readme and/or other docs, as we see the posts of the "other type" of users on VOGONS most of the time. Becaus of that, a discussion about how many users will read the docs is pointless, IMHO.

[quote="ADDiCT"]<irony>Thanks for your genius insight, the_bob. With 1 post on VOGONS, you're a DOSBox support specialist for sure.</irony>

We all know about the "users not reading docs"-effect, but i think it would make sense to include the FAQ with a DOSBox install. I mean, the info is here, so why not give it to the users? We will never know for sure how many users actually look at the readme and/or other docs, as we see the posts of the "other type" of users on VOGONS most of the time. Becaus of that, a discussion about how many users will read the docs is pointless, IMHO.[/quote]

Right. Let us not make it difficult. If the docs are available, why not include them? It is not fun to have a program that does not work when one follows the directions included. (What? I should chase around even more to maybe find good docs? It might be a better use of time to try another program.)

Even if someone reads the docs, he might miss something. (I just recently figured out how to get the intro command to work after about two years. It turned out that it is a program on Z:. Since I specified my own path, I had removed the Z: reference.)

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Since I specified my own path

Your fault then.

that does not work when one follows the directions included

What exactly?

[quote="wd"][quote]Since I specified my own path[/quote]
Your fault then.

Not really. It looked as if it were an internal command. I had no reason to suppose otherwise. Violating the Law of Least Astonishment is not good.

[quote]that does not work when one follows the directions included[/quote]
What exactly?[/quote]

You oversnipped. I was referring to programs in general that do not work, etc.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Violating the Law of Least Astonishment is not good.

But it's perfectly fine if the user already messed up his config.

I was referring to programs in general that do not work, etc

So what was the point of your original statement then?

MiniMax wrote:

It can't hurt to include it. But, maybe it is too difficult for some people to "read the README file in the DOSBox directory". The kind of people that don't even know where that DOSBox directory is.

Maybe some people just aren't fluent enough in programming to understand a README file written by Devs for Devs and not the layman?

Where's the problem?