1. Discussion

   I accumulated quite a collection of paper user or operator manuals, installation guides and instructions, and other errata (herein "manufacturer product documentation") for the various tools and equipment I acquired over several years. I stored them in a large paper crate under a chair in my dining room. Although physically available, they were inaccessible. Whenever I needed a manual to a tool I was using to renovate my house, for example, to determine what size arbor I should look for when buying a replacement blade, I would rummage through the box, sometimes not being able to locate the instructions, after which I would point my web browser at the manufacturer website, pull down documentation, and go shopping. This happened whether the manufacturer product documentation was the user's manual for a motherboard or power tool, or installation instructions for a light fixture or network switch (see below).

   At one point I had to decide between storing these documents in a paper crate or filing them so that I would be able to access them when needed, but I had no desire to maintain the equivalent of a personal library of manufacturer product documentation, and wanted to be able to search text and enlarge images when necessary.

   I decided to maintain a library on the house server of manufacturer product documentation downloaded from manufacturer websites, and began to search for and download manufacturer product documentation for all the tools and equipment I had acquired. I now do this when I acquire or procure new tools or equipment, for reasons that will be discussed below.

   Immediately I began to note a pattern: I was almost never able to find the same revision of the document on the manufacturer website (herein "online revision") that was packaged with the tool or equipment (herein "packaged revision"). In general, online revisions were much earlier revisions than packaged revisions, and frequently the first revision. In most cases, the packaged revision was unavailable from the manufacturer.

   I quickly identified two problems:

   • As a general rule, manufacturers do not make up-to-date product documentation available to consumers.
   • As a result, changes made by the manufacturer to packaged documentation are not available to consumers having access to online documentation only.
2. Analysis

   Documenting the results of an analysis of hundreds of paper user or operator manuals, installation guides and instructions, and other errata is beyond the scope of this medium, and would misrepresent the nature of my interest in resolving this problem. In addition, since I have completed my library I no longer have access to some of the documents.

   I have, however, decided to select one product as representative of the kinds of problems noted when attempting to replace the packaged revision of manufacturer product documentation with the online revision: the NETGEAR, Inc. (herein "NETGEAR") "ProSafe 5-Port Gigabit Ethernet Switch GS105v3"1 (herein "GS105v3").

   This may seem unfair. However, this pattern is pervasive and NETGEAR is not unique2. Some manufacturers make up-to-date online revisions of documentation available, but not prior revisions. Some manufacturers do not make online revisions of documentation available. Based on my experience, NETGEAR is typical of corporations which publish manufacturer product documentation for consumers, that is, neither the worst example nor the best:

   • NETGEAR made some documentation available, but it is not up-to-date.
   • Errors in documentation reveal misleading or incorrect information was provided to consumers. The author has not evaluated the impact of these errors and makes no assertions about the impact of these errors.
   • Omissions in documentation and other artifacts of the editing process reveal poor document control practices, in general.

   Throughout the paragraphs which follow, comparisons to the actual physical switch are comparisons to the GS105v3, and errors in documentation are presented as if they are errors in online documentation for the GS105v3, and not prior versions of the switch. Consumers seeking information for the GS105 are less likely to note discrepancies between the packaged revision included with the switch and online revision because the online revision is for prior versions of the switch. As noted below, manufacturer product documentation for the GS105v3 was not available from the manufacturer website (United States). However, an error in the documentation itself revealed the existence of an alternate, up-to-date version available from the manufacturer website (Japan). See Problem H, below.

   Refer to Section References for a list of objective evidence supporting the problems reported below.

   Problems include:

   1. Problem:

      The product name "ProSafe 5-Port Gigabit Ethernet Switch GS105v3" from the packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" does not match the product name from the online revision. The product name from the online revision is "5-Port Switch 10/100/1000 Mbps Gigabit Ethernet GS105".

   2. Problem:

      Product images from the online revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" and manufacturer website (United States) product page do not match the actual product. The product image indicates the physical dimensions of the switch are larger than those of the actual product and that the switch more closely resembles other current products, such as the GS108.

      The product image on page "Home > Products > Unmanaged Desktop Switches" of the manufacturer website (United States) matches the actual product.

   3. Problem:

      The product name "GS105v3" from the packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" implies this is the third revision of the GS105 series. The packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" is revision "August 2009". However, the online revision is revision "June 2003".

   4. Problem:

      The online revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" is more comprehensive and informative than the packaged revision. For example, the online revision describes the product in section "Introduction" and provides the user with a forward reference to the manufacturer website for "contact information".

   5. Problem:

      Section "Prepare to Install the Switch" of the packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" states: "You can use wall-mounting screws (not provided)..." However, product packaging included wall-mounting screws and anchors.

   6. Problem:

      Section "Prepare to Install the Switch" of the online revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" states: "...you'll need one Category 5 (Cat 5) Ethernet cable...for each device you want to connect to the switch."

      The IEEE 802.3ab standard is dated June, 1999 and described gigabit Ethernet transmission over unshielded twisted pair (UTP) category 5 and 5e cable. However, the use of Cat 5 Ethernet cable does not ensure reliable 1000Base-T operation. The high data rate makes gigabit Ethernet more susceptible to electrical interference [Comer] and Cat 5 Ethernet cable may perform below standard during high-speed data transfer. The Cat 5e specification ensures reliable 1000Base-T operation.

   7. Problem:

      Section "Install the Switch and Connect the Other Devices" of the online revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" is incorrect. The online revision states: "The corresponding Link LED for each connected and powered device should light and flash when activity occurs. If the connection is 1,000 Mbps or 100 Mbps, the LED in the RJ-45 jack will light up. If the connection is 10 Mbps, the 10M LED on the left side of the front panel will light up." That is, either the left or right LED will light up.

      Section "Install the Switch and Connect the Other Devices" of the packaged revision states: "Each RJ-45 jack has 2 LEDs. For each jack that is connected to a powered device, the Link LED is lit, and it flashes when activity occurs. If the connection is 10 Mbps or 100 Mbps, one LED lights up. If the connection is 1000 Mbps, both LEDs light up." That is, either one or both LEDS will light up.

   8. Problem:

      The packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" incorrectly refers to:
      "ISO/IEG 802.3i (ANSI/IEEE 802.i) 10BASE-T".

      The online revision correctly refers to:
      "ISO/IEC 802.3i (ANSI/IEEE 802.3i) 10BASE-T".

      Manufacturer product documentation for the GS105v3 was not available from the manufacturer website (United States). However, an Internet search for the specific string "iso/ieg 802.3i" revealed the existence of an alternate, up-to-date version available from the manufacturer website (Japan).

      In addition, the online revision refers to:
      "IEEE 802.3z 1000BASE-T". The IEEE 802.3z standard is dated June, 1998, and described Gigabit Ethernet transmission over optical fiber, not UTP cable.

      The packaged revision correctly refers to:
      "IEEE 802.3ab 1000BASE-T".

   9. Problem:

      Section "Statement of Conditions" of the online revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" states: "In the interest of improving internal design, operational function, and/or reliability, NETGEAR reserves the right to make changes to the product described in this document without notice."

      Section "Statement of Conditions" of the packaged revision states: "In the interest of improving internal design, operational function, and/operability, NETGEAR reserves the right to make changes to the product described in this document without notice."

   10. Problem:

       Section "Technical Support" of the packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" refers to a "Smart Wizard configuration assistant". However, no software was packaged with the GS105v3.

       The online revision does not refer to the "Smart Wizard configuration assistant".

   11. Problem:

       Section "Troubleshooting" of the packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" introduces the word "that" in the construction "Make sure that".

       Similar construction in section "Troubleshooting" of the online revision does not use the word "that".

3. Results

   Based on experience gained from years of auditing as a professional, many people reading the problems identified above will be asking themselves: "So what?" or "Who cares?" Charitably, they may say to themselves, "Yes, but why does this matter?" If they have experience in quality, they may automatically align their deflectors, and say: "These problems are minor editorial errors or omissions. NETGEAR specifically disclaims liability3".

   All of which may be true. I didn't have any problem setting up a network using the NETGEAR GS105v3, so perhaps, to some measure, there is no problem. However, deficiencies potentially impact NETGEAR or the consumer and several of the problems are evidence of deficient document control practices, which is a more severe problem.

   1. Deficiencies

      Problems E, F, and G represent the only deficiencies, in any sense of the word, which potentially impact NETGEAR or the consumer.

      1. Problem E is a potential deficiency if the decision not to include mounting hardware was made based on cost to NETGEAR, and the cost savings of that decision are not being realized.
      2. Problem F is a potential deficiency because the consumer may be misled, or may have been misled, into buying Cat 5 Ethernet cable when Cat 5e Ethernet cable was required. As noted, the use of Cat 5 Ethernet cable does not ensure reliable 1000Base-T operation.

         This problem may have been a minor inconvenience for a relatively small number of consumers for a variety of reasons. For example:

         • The knowledge base of the consumer or sales staff at major retailers may have mitigated the problem.
         • The lack of availability of Cat 5 Ethernet cable from major retailers at the time prior versions of the switch were manufactured and available for retail sale may have mitigated the problem.

         Alternately, this problem:

         • may have led to losses which at first glance appear to be insignificant but which are significant when distributed across a wide installed base. In other words, the potential impact to a single consumer may have been only a twelve dollar network cable, which is insignificant unless the cascading impact of returning the network cable to a retailer for a refund is considered. But the impact to the installed base may have been a twelve dollar network cable per consumer multiplied by ten thousand consumers, which is significant.
         • may have degraded service, but in such a manner that the consumer was not aware the full capabilities of the switch were not being used.
         • may have resulted in no real impact.

         In the absence of reports from consumers placing the problem in perspective, it is impossible to determine what kind of impact the problem may have had. As a result, the author has not evaluated the impact of this error and makes no assertions about the impact of this error.

      3. Problem G is a deficiency because it is not factual, but again, in the absence of reports from consumers placing the problem in perspective, it is impossible to determine what kind of impact, if any, the problem may have had. In the author's personal experience, visual indicators of network activity are intuitive and easy to understand.
   2. Significant deficiencies

      Several of the problems noted are evidence of deficient document control practices in general, which is a more severe problem. For example:

      1. Failure to maintain concurrent up-to-date revisions of manufacturer product documentation for different versions of the product is a common problem. The problem is exacerbated when the manufacturer does not update the online revision in accordance with the packaged revision when it updates the packaged revision. See Problems A, B, C, and D. In this specific example, the manufacturer does not maintain online revisions of manufacturer product documentation for each of versions one4 through three of the GS105 switch, and for each version the most up-to-date revision of the documentation.
      2. Errors, omissions, and changes in the "voice" of manufacturer product documentation indicate the source material for the packaged revision of the manufacturer "Installation Guide" was not the source material for the online revision, or errors would not have crept into the packaged revision that were not present in the online revision. See Problems H, I, J, and K.
4. Conclusions
   1. An integrated document control solution is necessary

      A mentor of mine once said: "Document control is real simple, if you do it right."

      The problem, he would say, is that no one does it right.

      However, the days of managing the finite number of documents necessary to run a business are long gone for most companies. In general, document control practices have not caught up with the need to maintain multiple revisions of documentation for multiple versions of products which may differ only in appearance or the presence of some minor feature. For consumer electronics the problem may be exacerbated, for example, by the presence of a specific chipset offering specific features which may not be present in otherwise identical versions of the same product.

      A more robust solution is needed, one which integrates production and publication of the online revisions of manufacturer product documentation with packaged revisions of the same documentation. For most companies, this change will not incur significant cost because the applications which support publication of manufacturer product documentation are in wide use. For most companies this is a cultural change, one which requires they commit to making the distinction between online and packaged revisions of documentation irrelevant, and revising their internal practices to support the production and publication of both versions of manufacturer product documentation for their customers at the same time, and on an as-needed basis.

   2. ISO 9001 Quality Management System (QMS) certification does not ensure compliance

      Following my review of the Greenlee GT-12, I decided to determine the ISO 9001 or other QMS certification status for manufacturers of products previously reviewed for comparison. NETGEAR stated: "All NETGEAR manufacturing partners are ISO 9001 and/or ISO 14001 certified", including Netgear, Inc.

      NETGEAR's ISO 9001 certification states: "Scope: The planning of design and development, sales and marketing, sub-contractor management and delivery of networking products for the Service Provider business unit of Netgear, Inc." and "Through an audit, documented in a report, it was verified that the management system fulfills the requirements of the following standard: ISO 9001 : 2008".5

      The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) states: "ISO 9001:2008 has been developed in order to introduce clarifications to the existing requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and changes that are intended to improve compatibility with ISO 14001:2004. ISO 9001:2008 does not introduce additional requirements nor does it change the intent of the ISO 9001:2000 standard."6

      Paragraphs 7.2.1 ("Determination of requirements related to the product"), 7.2.3 ("Customer communication"), and 7.3.3 ("Design and development outputs") of ISO 9001:2000 appear to require NETGEAR to develop, communicate, and provide appropriate and adequate documentation to the end-user of the NETGEAR GS105v3. However, the intent of words such as "customer" and "service provision" is an issue when dealing with ISO 9001. Although ISO 9000 states the end-user is an example of a customer, it is not uncommon for organizations to lose focus on the end-user and concentrate their attention on internal customers or external providers or suppliers as customers of design and development planning, or for the scope of an organization's certification to be so narrowly-defined that the organization does not consider the end-user to be a customer or the recipient of a service provided by the organization.

      In either case, the author asserts the end-user is a customer and that NETGEAR should provide appropriate and adequate documentation for its products as a service to the end-user.

References.

Endnotes.