Introducing docs.microsoft.com
docs.microsoft.com
docs.microsoft.com
"Shortened Article Length
Another common piece of feedback was that our content at times can be overwhelming because of its length and that long articles are more difficult to navigate and find what you’re looking for. To address this, we’ve broken down many longer articles into smaller logical steps and provided Previous and Next buttons at the bottom of articles to navigate between steps in a multi-part tutorial as shown below."
Sounds like a race to the bottom. I very much prefer long single-page articles.
This makes no sense at all, even if you think people's attention spans have shortened. You see the same amount of content at once regardless of whether it's been paged, unless your browser window is ridiculously large or the content has been literally split into paragraph-per-page levels of fragmentation. You'll eventually get to see all the same content, but you have to spend more clicks (and possibly scroll) to get to the part you want instead of just scrolling. I have the same gripe with some other sites that love click-toggling sections (especially when there is no "expand all" button, or expanding one collapses the others, or even worse --- they default to collapsed without JS.)
Maybe it's the result of some stupid "engagement" metric that awards clicking around? That's completely counter to the point of documentation; it's not supposed to require much interaction, it's supposed to be something you passively read while doing whatever it is you need to with the information you've consumed.
It seems it's exactly this (I see I'm linking to your another post, but it really deserves to be prominent):
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11627448
fyre.co Livefyre "The Leading Content Marketing and Engagement Platform" (a site slogan by that company)
Thanks for the feedback, and we went through a lot of customer feedback already on this. I'll try to be brief in a response
- A good example on why - For our documentation we clearly saw customers jumping around content trying to find the part of the article that helps them. Depending on the article (see point #2) very few people read from beginning to end. A good example here is that instead of having separate articles on how to setup iOS, Android and Windows phone devices with Intune, the previous articles had that as part of a much later article. If an admin who's company has standardized on Android, they want just the Android content, they don't want to have to sift through iOS/Windows troubleshooting to get to the Android setup content. For SEO, it's also much more likely that they'll find the solution by Googling (with or without Bing) to something like "Setup Intune Android" and go directly to the page that takes care of just that task. For developers, we face the same problem where some articles include multiple langauges and code samples are duplicated. Instead of doing that, we would break the article into pieces by language.
- Another key reason is not all content is built the same. We'd get feedback that many of our competitors have a much simpler "Getting Started" tutorial, while ours would be much longer and we'd get feedback that it seems more complex or overwhelming. When you are just starting off, "Hello World" is a lot better than War & Peace. It's about thinking about the right level of content for the task our customers are going through. In some cases, it's fine to have one long article.
- We will also provide the option for customers to have all content together versus having content broken into separate pieces and made available for offline. Customers want both.
- The reason we called this out is that the previous architecture doesn't not even have this as a capability.
I hope this helps give some context on the decision and thanks for the feedback.
Don't break links to old versions of documents!
(I realise this requires building a redirect forest. But we're talking 20 years of MS documentation.)
No, we will not break links. We are doing graceful redirects from MSDN/TechNet to the new site.
It's frustrating to say the least and I'd prefer we not even deploy the product.
Isn't that what anchor tags are for? You can share them in URLs...
The proper solution for them is to look at Wikipedia as an example. Tables of contents in longer articles, manually introducing the new topics or reorganizing when it's reasonable. And it's not something that can be automated.
Automatic splitting of long pages to shorter ones is good only for "we get money for clicks" media but not for a repository of knowledge with serious intentions.
Adding yet another site to the list of sites which might or might not have up-to-date content is not going to fix that issue. What they need is a central, properly searchable and well-maintained repository that spans all of their products.
[0] https://msdn.microsoft.com/library [1] https://technet.microsoft.com/library/default.aspx
"usually"
"only two"
That means that Google.com is still needed as the front-end to MS documentation. Ergo, it doesn't matter how many domains they use to host their documentation.
Thanks, this is great feedback and something we totally agree and want to fix. We recently created a redirection service, which historically did not exist on MSDN/TechNet so that when content moves, we can properly 301 redirect content to the correct place. This will help for net new content that moves, but as you correctly point out, we still have a lot of work to do for existing content.
Thanks again for the feedback!
Would you like to take a short 25 minute survey? You visited this site 25,000 times previously and we have asked each of those times, but maybe this time you will change your mind and answer the survey.
We are fixing that. Thank you for the feedback!
The login proxy (where it checks if you are a user or not and if you should login to track you) really sucked too, I would just use the docs in private browsing mode and it would be 10x faster.
Thanks for your hard work, the new docs look excellent.
Last year we embraced Sharepoint - with expectations of replacing much of the above. (It didn't.)
Evidently no one uses Sharepoint as a way of presenting documentation to the world - let alone using the wiki-like features - not even Microsoft. What's the opposite of NIH syndrome?
14?! Ridiculous! We need to develop one universal store that covers everyone's use cases.
Situation: There are 15 competing information stores.
Sometimes you have to push to fix the process
More power to them, btw. Most (HN) people's complaints sound fairly cosmetic - easy enough to adjust. Sensible URL's are probably worth the cost of conversion alone. But my point is/was that this doesn't appear to be a re-skinning of Sharepoint - it looks like (yet another) bespoke DMS.
I just assumed they meant Sharepoint there.
Also, the marked-text context menu: that only works within a single paragraph. Cross over to the next and it's not showing any more.
Sending snippets of docs via email and other means is key - and is so much easier than signing into a third party service, using some lame social share feature, and then trying to find your contact there instead.
Aside from that, new layout looks nice!
MSDN is the best documentation I ever seen from OS vendors.
Not to mention the mainframe, commercial UNIX and embedded real time OSes, even worse than those mentioned above.
This one looks very poor versus MSDN content.
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterp...
Red Hat's OS docs are very good. I'm not sure it's their job to document what you're asking for.
MSDN documents everything that Microsoft delivers to Windows developers, OS, programming languages, frameworks, IDEs, system administration,knowledge base, magazines and books.
Edit: Also, it's extremely narrow. On my 32" 4K display, 70% of the screen is empty. And the font is too think. And stuff keeps moving/jumping when I'm moving the mouse cursor.
I want 1998 back.
I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one! I compulsively select random blocks of text: select up, select down, repeat. I definitely get annoyed with the popup-menu-on-select feature of Medium, but I feel I can hardly blame Medium for my random, compulsive habit.
I have the unshakable habit of triple-clicking a paragraph to highlight it to serve as a mark of where I was at when i need to interrupt reading.
In the game you have to select units by dragging a box around them, and that habit has carried over to selecting text on the screen in pretty much every computer application.
I know that probably doesn't answer your question, but that would probably require a neuroscientist. It doesn't help me read personally, it just seems to be one of those repetitive tasks that slightly autistic people do.
Some of my coworkers share this habit as well, and they've never played RTS games, so it's acquired in different ways.
(1) not even on the claim that that bookmark has that effect.
No, clicking four times doesn't select the whole page.
It has to do with border-spacing between table cells -- when you select text that runs into the border-spacing, it resets the selection to go from 1) original cell 2) start of the table 3) next cell.
With more sane styling (ie: setting border-spacing to 0), the selection won't jump to the start of the table.
This is just heaven here: http://imgur.com/asQy8v3
Look at all those lovely lines and right angles.
I suspect it's related to some patterns when reading books, like putting a bookmark below your current line and moving it down, or following your current position with your finger.
Totally agreed on your other points (particularly about animations on selection) but as the article mentions, eye tracking repeatedly shows people have trouble reading very wide text. Also many people use large monitors to have multiple windows, rather than a single window maximised.
I've noticed also that I don't like to read text that starts on the left of the screen.
The solution that works for me is to install a sidebar (on Firefox, AiOS add-on) and if text is too wide or starts too much on the left, I enable and resize sidebar accordingly :)
Yes but to optimize for larger screens, the correct thing to do is to scale everything up (fonts, spacing, etc) in a responsive manner.
The amount of text content per line wouldn't change much, it would just fill up the screen better instead of using the same tiny font size you'd use for a 13inch screen @ 1080p on a 32" 4K display.
When lines get longer you either have to increase the leading, or font size, or shorten the lines to retain readability. Personally I hate having to detach every other tab from the browser just to change to width to something that's readable. In that sense I much prefer the content to have a maximum width beyond a certain viewport width because it's the only viable option to still have text that is readable.
(It's one of the things I loved about the design style of Windows 8 apps that has been lost in the Windows 8 hate, and admittedly was a part of the Windows 8 hate, because people don't respect a good horizontal scroll of columnar reading material, sigh.)
IPS panels should work without a problem in both landscape and portrait mode.
That way your primary monitor can still be used to watch media and play games in the "standard" widescreen format, but your code and browser can readily be viewed on the sides.
Yes it's quite bad on that blog post, but if you check out an article [1] it doesn't suffer from that problem. Still has the selection-reader [2] problem, though.
[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/remoteapp/remoteapp-whatis
[2] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20150528-00/?p=...
Yes, this is a bug and something we will fix, thanks for calling this out :)
It goes to the right of the paragraph in that case instead of the last sentence of the paragraph.
Looks like something to block regardless of whether it creates annoying menus. Is anyone else a little surprised (and perhaps repulsed) by Microsoft putting semi-shady 3rd-party scripts like this on their site? This seems completely opposite of what the Microsoft I knew would do.
I'd be happy with 2011, just before the Metro-inspired redesign of MSDN hit.
http://web.archive.org/web/20111228110049/http://msdn.micros...
http://web.archive.org/web/20130422112102/http://msdn.micros...
http://web.archive.org/web/20150102192514/http://msdn.micros...
I very much prefer the first design too.
I do the same thing when reading text and HATE websites that do this, the solution I've found is to just use uBlock Origin to block annoying web elements like this. You can do the same, just add the following filters:
docs.microsoft.com##body > .lf:nth-of-type(7) > .lf-active.lf-selection-popover.lf-popover > .lf-popover-content.lf-thread-content
docs.microsoft.com##body > .lf:nth-of-type(7) > .lf-active.lf-selection-popover.lf-popover > .lf-popover-arrow
Welcome to the last few years. I thought, when i bought a 24 inch monitor, I'd be using all of it; instead I'm minimizing Firefox so that sites don't look silly. I guess when you're using technology as badly designed as that used to create/display websites anything harder than justifying text and images becomes a nightmare to develop and support.
Why maximize a browser window on such a screen? Three or four windows side by side would take advantage of it.
Edit: looks like it's being served from fyre.co, which might be blocked by adblockers?
Could browsers not be smarter about this? If I'm on page A and I click a link X that redirects to B, when I click back I expect to go back to A, especially if X still redirects to B.
Azure? git clone https://github.com/Azure/azure-content.git
Azure RMS? git clone https://github.com/Microsoft/Azure-RMSDocs.git
...
If you compare their screenshot: https://docs.microsoft.com/teamblog/content/images/2016/05/D...
To one of mine: https://imgur.com/rFwTqUW
It's not even close.
Edit: Seems the "blog" portion is very different than the actual docs: https://imgur.com/YKvFxCh
Thanks folks, we had Segoe UI Light on the blog and have switched it to use the same font as our docs!
docs.microsoft.com looks like it will be a very nice upgrade.
/* disable social sharing buttons */
.lf-selection-popover,.lf-thread-btn{display:none;}
aside#social{display:none;}
/* make sidebar thinner and content wider */
@media only screen and (min-width: 1024px){#sidebar{max-width:20%;}}
@media only screen and (min-width: 1024px){div#main{max-width:80%;width:auto;margin:0;}}
body>div.container{max-width:none;}
/* make blog post wider */
article.post{max-width:none;}As a reference, take a look at (if you're not familiar with it already) at PostgreSQL's manual[1]. With Postgres, I don't need to search, I can (nearly always) find what I need by scanning the table of contents by eyeball. Also, I can download the whole thing as a PDF for offline reading (or printing if I wanted to).
This is an example of the standard Microsoft should aim for. And that's just the first example I can think of off the top of my hat. FreeBSD has a great manual, too, and last time I looked, the JDK also came with very good - and well-organized - documentation. I don't think it is hard to do per se, just very tedious, but Microsoft certainly has the resources to do it if management makes it a priority.
I am sorry for ranting a little here, but the state of Microsoft's documentation is very disappointing in light of the resources they have; when I was a Linux newbie and made the mistake of asking a stupid question on a discussion board, I got flamed rather hard about not having read the documentation. I then replied - my second mistake, I guess - that apparently to Unix people, "user friendly" means "comes with more documentation than you'd ever want to read". One of the flamers replied - in a very matter of fact tone - that, yes, documentation is always good, because without documentation you're screwed eventually; with good documentation, no matter how complicated and nasty a program is, at least you have a chance. It took me many years to understand the wisdom in those words, but I think I only came to really appreciate them since I became a Windows admin.
However I'm pretty sure writing excellent documentation must be a very hard task, otherwise it wouldn't be such a rarity. Of course, Microsoft has the resources to do it, but the level of resources required to produce and maintain surely must be decidedly non-trivial. Reasonably, we could conclude they think it provides poor ROI.
We might well beg to differ on that point, and worth saying how much their inadequate documentation reflects the quality and utility of their products.
I wouldn't exactly call it a tutorial but it did teach me a great deal about SQL when I started using the db > 15 years ago.
New standards and features have made the program more complicated over time, so periodically I need to study up on these topics. More than a few times, it's been really useful to have that "beginner level" info re: stuff that's new to me.
But like you say, not all subjects are covered that way, perhaps they haven't been considered to be basic. I bet if there are enough requests the project would improve the documentation in those areas.
I have to say I miss the old VS6 MSDN days. It was so much simpler then with just a bunch of help files.
It is crazy that today documentation is still such a weak point. I just want clean documentation that I can format how I want (user style sheets) with lots of solid example code.
Yes, we are planning to address content structure to make sure that all important reference and conceptual information is well-organized and accessible. If you have any particular concerns regarding this, feel free to shoot me an email: dendeli [at] microsoft
Now the best method I've found for finding content on msdn is a google search. If this no longer works my UWP interest will probably not be worth the bother.
Shameless pug, We currently working on documentation hub for developers https://www.docsapp.io/
-what flavor of Markdown do you support (captions/TOC/auto-number figures and tables)
-can I paste images from the clipboard directly into the editor (like one can with github issues)?
-what's the advantages over setting up my own git repo and using something like gitbooks?
....
You _really_ should have a demo available for people to try out.
- We support Github Flavored Markdown
- We dont have paste image from clipboard, but we will add the feature idea to roadmap.
- We provide support for versioning, fulltext search, private internal documentation (soon)
> Fundamentals like site performance are a key feature and something many customers have asked us to improve on UserVoice. Page load time on docs.microsoft.com are between 50-300% faster in terms of load time and we are better geo-distributed than ever before. We’ve also built on an architecture that is running 100% on Azure.
But there is really important knowledge out there regarding ease of reading, contrast, ideal formatting, etc.
Cant believe that they choose a font weight that is so light. That alone makes this redesign way worse than the original.
Looking at the actual documentation site, its not bad on first glance.
I thought it as a canonical pointer for Office 365 docs.
Not at all. We do graceful 301 redirects, so for all content from MSDN/TechNet that gets moved, none of the references will break.