Non, monsieur. He is saying that any prosuct, whether flawless or not, must have proper information about it, since we are not born knowing how to use Windows, either.
Yeah, a lady got third degree vagina burns and a fused labia from McDonald’s coffee. She needed surgery and skin grafts. She sued them and asked for her surgery bills paid, but the judge noticed that McDonald’s had already got a lot of complaints about serving dangerously hot coffee, and he decided to award her one full day’s worth of profits to teach them a lesson.
But for real, I think you misunderstand the point of documentation. Even if something were truly, literally flawless, having documentation would still be a net gain. It isn’t only to fix something when it goes wrong, but explains how things are working. If the only way for something to be literally flawless in your world view is for it to be so self explanatory that an idiot seeing it for the first time still understands it perfectly, nothing in computing can be flawless in that way.
The pedantry on this point is so unhelpful as to be actively harmful to the rest of the discussion.
Flawless wouldn’t require any documentation.
There are instructions on your McDonalds coffee that say, “This coffee is hot.”
You might feel as though no documentation is necessary here, but clearly it was a critical miss for someone.
Are you saying McDonalds Coffee is flawless?
Non, monsieur. He is saying that any prosuct, whether flawless or not, must have proper information about it, since we are not born knowing how to use Windows, either.
Yeah, a lady got third degree vagina burns and a fused labia from McDonald’s coffee. She needed surgery and skin grafts. She sued them and asked for her surgery bills paid, but the judge noticed that McDonald’s had already got a lot of complaints about serving dangerously hot coffee, and he decided to award her one full day’s worth of profits to teach them a lesson.
Everything requires some documentation.
They didn’t say it required documentation, they said it had plenty of documentation should you need it.
And I’m telling you to grab a dictionary and lookup what flawless means
Damnit, you’re right!
But for real, I think you misunderstand the point of documentation. Even if something were truly, literally flawless, having documentation would still be a net gain. It isn’t only to fix something when it goes wrong, but explains how things are working. If the only way for something to be literally flawless in your world view is for it to be so self explanatory that an idiot seeing it for the first time still understands it perfectly, nothing in computing can be flawless in that way.
The pedantry on this point is so unhelpful as to be actively harmful to the rest of the discussion.
Just a heads up- You appear to be interpreting things in a strictly literal sense.
Some people might view this as trolling.
That’s so passive aggressive it’s impressive.
I distro hop regularly, still have to see that one ‘flawless’ distro, or system for that matter.
Agree.