This book is a good reference for anyone working in software development. It is not a how-to book, instead it provides good information on the areas important to developing quality software. I recommend this book for anyone looking to implement or improve thier software processes.

Krauss

This is the first book produced by the Software Quality Institute (SQI) of the University of Texas at Austin. Therefore, it is not surprising that the book is about building high-quality software systems. As the authors point out throughout the book, constructing high-quality software systems result in delivering high quality end-product, having satisfied customers, and completing projects within the cost and schedule constraints. The central theme of the book is "quality" and how to integrate it in the entire software development process to produce superior products. It is refreshing to note that the book, instead of treating quality as separate measure, shows how it should start from the beginning of the project and permeate to all aspects of the development cycle. The book is divided into three parts. Part I- Quality Systems, starts with concepts of Software Development System (SDS). Part II- Quality Design covers the importance and criticality of software architecture to achieve required functions, performance levels, and reliability of the system. Part III - Quality Projects outlines important considerations of software development process such as Team building, implementing effective and reliable measurement, and selection of appropriate tools.

The book is written in an easy-to-read style with sufficient examples to back up the discussion. Software professionals at all levels--- project manger, developers, and QA specialists- will benefit from reading this book and periodically reviewing it to remind themselves what is important to produce a high-quality software system. Those looking for an exhaustive discussion on the topics contained in the book will find it a good starting point with sufficient references for further study.

Chetna

The writers have done an excellent job of describing how to build quality software in a practical way. The writers not only have a good theoretical understanding of developing quality software systems, it's clear that they are practitioners as well. A practitioner of software development will readily identify with the book and will find it useful in each phase of the development life cycle. I particularily enjoyed the chapters on software architecture and software measurement. Thank you!

David

The review of Paul Garrison's new book, Fire and Ice, intrigued me so I purchased it. However, although the plot developed rapidly, the reader was required early on to endure an abundance of technical sailing jargon/maneuvers to bridge to the more meaningful parts of the plot. The miraculous ability of the lead character to overcome all obstacles in his path, including natural phenomenon, was very unrealistic and annoying to this reader to the point of sometimes being even ludicrous.

The book was mediocre reading with a lot of potential action to play on, but I found the plot underdeveloped, incomplete, and some very unbelievable solutions to, and some very 'casual' escapes from some BIG problems.

As an avid sailor, I appreciate the accuracy of Garrison's portrayal. However, it certainly appears to me that this book is all but a sequel to Justin Scott's excellent sailing suspense novel The Shipkiller. Same boat (Swan 38), same characters (white Dr. inventor, black Doctor wife) whose background matches those of the characters from The Shipkiller. I think The Shipkiller is one of the best novels I've ever read. Fire and Ice is an excellent follow on. I am just surprised that there is no credit or mention of Shipkiller given.

I LOVED Paul Garrison's "Fire and Ice" as the author swept me away to Asia and the ocean and adventures that seemed so gritty and so real that I was desperate to keep turning pages until the end. It's wonderful to find an author who sounds authoritative about such a remote, adventurous background and his take on the steamy, grimy industrialization of China was amazingly real for me. I found the technical "stuff" never got in the way and added to the verisimilitude of the racing storyline. I'm a "bookaholic" who's read thousands of suspense thrillers of all types and this one is one of the BEST I've ever read.

by Steven Piraino. You are probably familiar with the recently passed Bush tax bill. You may also be familiar with Paul Krugman of Princeton University (formerly of M.I.T.), whose "New Keynesian" musings appear regularly on The New York Times editorial page. Recently, Krugman published his own critique of the Bush tax cut in a short, popular book entitled Fuzzy Math. To the author's credit, this book is brief, well-organized and tightly argued. Instead of aggressively pushing his own left-of-center political views onto the reader, Krugman spends most of the book exposing inconsistencies in the Bush administration's tax-cut sales pitch. He summarizes his own conclusions rather nicely: "Bush and his people . . . are radically understating the cost of their plan while overstating the money available to pay that cost. They have pretended that a plan that mainly cuts taxes for the extremely well off is basically a middle-class tax cut . . . And they have falsely sold the plan as an appropriate answer to a short run economic slowdown, when it is almost perfectly designed not to deal with that sort of problem." Much of this book is difficult to criticize on its own terms, as all of Krugman's claims have some merit. The Bush tax cut probably is less progressive and more "costly" than the Bush administration would have us believe. And, if anything, Krugman is not skeptical enough about the antirecessionary merits of using a tax cut to put money into consumers' pockets. This does not mean, however, that there is not a legitimate case for reducing taxes. As Krugman himself says, ". . . there is a case for tax cuts . . . though it is not the case the Bush administration is making." Unfortunately, the "legitimate case" that Krugman makes (and rejects) is weak and incomplete. The "correct" case for tax cuts, Krugman argues, is that tax cuts are a way to "induce people to work harder, save more, and take bigger risks." He then goes on to dismiss this case on the grounds that these benefits are unlikely to be dramatic. While superficially plausible, this analysis obscures the very essence of taxation and its costs. It is true that heavy taxation causes a variety of behavioral distortions, such as discouraging work, innovation, and investment. However, these distortions are not the costs of taxation, as Krugman suggests. They are the means that individuals employ to reduce the costs of taxation as much as possible. Furthermore, taxes are not costly because they reduce production; taxes are costly because they force individuals to consume a mix of goods that is less desirable from the standpoint of their own subjective preferences. This happens for two reasons. First, individuals behave differently in order to avoid paying a certain tax. As a result, goods that are taxed are underproduced. It is irrelevant whether or not the resulting mix of goods involves less labor, risk-taking, and investment than the mix of goods that would be produced on the free market. The important point is that the new mix is inferior to the old mix in relation to individual wants. Second, taxes transfer the command over resources from the private sector to the public sector. This is costly from the standpoint of individual wants. In the private sector, waste is minimized through the discipline of profits and losses. In the public sector, however, politicians acquire resources based on their ability to speak in public, smear opponents, and reward well-organized pressure groups. As a result, the spending projects financed by taxation generally bear little, if any, relation to the desires of consumers. Value-productive private ventures are starved of capital so that a whole host of useless or nearly useless "public goods" can be (over)produced. Consider, for example, the state of Massachusetts's infamous Big Dig transportation project (now running some $12 billion over budget), or the interstate highway splurge of the 1950s, or the pork-laden federal space program. Private investors would never pony up the extravagant sums that were necessary to fund these dubious projects, yet the list of public boondoggles goes on and on. Krugman's book makes essentially no attempt to defend politics as a means of resource allocation, making only the blithe assertion that "it's a value judgment, but I don't accept the idea that our government is too big and should be made much smaller." Krugman has the right to his own value judgments, but economics does have something positive to say about the market system-and that is that all parties necessarily benefit from the rights to voluntary exchange and association. This system stands in sharp contrast with the current political system, wherein resources are allocated with almost boundless disregard for consumers' wants. Whatever else can be said for such a system, the science of economics offers little or nothing to recommend it. If the Bush tax cuts bring us miles, yards, or even inches further from this system, a sound understanding of economics clearly strengthens, not weakens, their appeal.

This book needs to be read by every voting American, even those who support the Bush tax cut. Author Paul Krugman clearly explains the economic and political environments in which this tax plan takes place and concludes, first, that the tax cut is not only a bad idea but might have serious consequences as the Social Security/Medicare system becomes strapped and second, that "at every stage of the debate Bush and his people have tried to obscure what they were really proposing."
"Fuzzy Math" is a book written for intelligent lay people. I personally read it in two sittings (it's only 122 short pages), then, thinking that I must have missed smething, went back and read it again. It turns out I missed nothing. Krugman breaks down complex economic concepts and explains them with great lucidity and a little bit of wit. It's really an easy read.
Krugman begins by explaining how Bush arrived at his tax cut as the centerpiece of his campaign, first as an antidote to Steve Forbes' "Flat Tax" crusade and second, to secure the support of the far right elements of the Republican Party. He then describes the efficacy of tax cuts as an economic tool, particularly as they might be used to stimulate a sluggish economy (never an issue for Bush until the economy suddenly turned sour). He concludes that this is best left to the Federal Reserve Board's manipulation of interest rates. He further compares "demand side" tax reductions, aimed primarily at consumers, with "supply side" cuts which are directed toward potential producers and demonstrates that despite the Reagan rhetoric, the economic recovery of the early '80's was demand side driven and that a real supply side expansion occurred during the late '90's happened despite Bill Clinton's upper bracket tax increase.
Nexy Krugman explains the Federal Budget, beginning with where the money goes and then where it comes from. He explains that we've gone from being a "military state" to a "retirement state". He admittedly caricatures that, based on federal spending "the federal government has become a large retirement community that does some military stuff and a bit of humanitarian stuff on the side". He also explains that our national retirement program is not fully funded (as is a private pension plan). Instead the current group of retirees is living off the contributions of the current group of workers and that enormous problems will begin when the number of retirees begins to swell as the number of workers begins to shrink (about 2011). This is aleo why privatization of Social Security/Medicare is a bad idea: it will simply pull the rug out from under the feet of the current group of retirees. He discusses the origins of the recent budget surplus andhow it was tied to the recent economic boom.
He then breaks down the Bush tax cut, explaining who gets what. Using figures from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and Citizens for Tax Justice (stats from conservative think tanks are unavailable) he concludes that about 40% of American families will get nothing or very little while the top 1% will collect about 45% of the benefits. He analyzes the Treasury Department's statistics in light of this data and exposes the hucksterism involved in the official Bush line. Unfortunately this is the only piont at which Krugman cites sources although he uses statistics elsewhere in this book. More citations would have given the book a little more authority.
Finally he proposes an alternative, a "smaller, faster, cheaper, better" cut that will get money into the hands of consumers faster and will be "front loaded" (benefits sooner) as opposed to Bush's "back loaded" (most benefits arrive much later) and so will have an immediate effect on the economy.
Krugman concludes with a swipe at the "utter dishonesty of the sales campaign".
There is no reason why every American citizen should not read this book. It explains what's going on in the tax debate and does so clearly and simply. In fact, bookshelves in any participatory democracy should be full of books like this.

Every policy-maker and voter should read this book. After months of Krugman's anti-tac-cut NY Times Op-Eds, I was sick of hearing about this debate. But "Fuzzy Math" literally changed my mind in one night. It is not only a guide to the Bush tax cut but also a layman's guide to general tax policy, tax law, the federal budget, and distributional issues. Not only that, but Krugman provides a novel theory (at least to me) on why anti-big-government ideologues prefer tax cuts for the rich disproportionately over tax cuts for the bottom 99%. Krugman also exposes many statistical and other tricks that policy-makers play on the public in order to promote their programs. In short, this book does so much so thoroughly, and I am amazed that Krugman fit it all into so few pages.

Unlike most business plan guides that focus on producing an impressive document, this book actually helped me plan to run a company. It anticipates and explains virtually every potential pitfall for a company-builder. The book transforms the business planning process into something that you can and should use every day. It touches all aspects of analyzing your business and deciding where to go next. I highly recommend it.

I provide consulting help on business and strategic planning for clients in the US and Brazil. I came across this book originally in its Portuguese version. Now, I'm recommending it to all my clients in both countries. It makes my job of explaining what is a business plan much easier and introduces business people to the ideas and, more importantly, the attitude you need to undertake planning. I recommend it highly.

Bypass the complete book of business plans and go right to this book. Not only did it assist me (tremendously!) in the writing of my plan, but I enjoyed it from both the perspective of useful information and it's concise yet comprehensive content. This book attempts to do what so many "how to" books fail to do... it tells you how to do what you're looking to do in a straightforward and matter-of fact way. There's not a lot of philosophizing in this book (yawn!) like you might find in others but rather an abundance of useful, timely and real world information. Writing a plan? Read this book!

This book is one in Zondervan's Counterpoints Series, which presents the view of various (mostly) Evangelical writers on theological subjects. This book is sorely needed because Evangelical apologists have had a history of writing critically and polemically of one another (one thinks of the Clark/Van Til debate), with the result of the layman having a difficult time deciding among the various positions.

The problem with this book is either that the writers are too timid or are more irenic than their label would indicate. There are three authors who present variations on the traditional approach: the classical method (Craig), the evidential method (Habermas), and the cumulative case method (Feinberg). These approaches are quite similar, although some differences do arise. When the reader gets to John Frame's presuppositional method, he expects to get a starkly different approach. After all, Van Til was notorious for attacking "traditional" apologetics as "Roman Catholic" or "Arminian." Well, Frame tells us that he agrees with most of what Craig writes. The final writer, Kelly James Clark (who represents the "Reformed epistemological method"), says the same thing.

Perhaps the editor could have selected a follower of Gordon Clark (a rationalist who denied the proofs of God's existence) or a fideist to present a contrasting apologetic method.

Before I write anything, I would like to suggest that the reader of "Five Views on Apologetics" first read "Faith Has Its Reasons" by Kenneth Bow and Robert Bowman, Jr. (NavPress). Doing so will give you a good overview of the methodology taken by the different positions; it would be akin to reading a preview of this afternoon's football game, with a summary of the players and the strategy that will be used fully explained.

Overall "Five Views on Apologetics" is worthwhile for the serious-minded Christian. I do like these "View" books because they allow all sides to take part in a dialogue that certainly has more potential to get things accomplished rather than a free-for-all live debate. All sides get to give their side with succeeding rebuttals. This book certainly had some lively discussion as all of the participants had their own ideas of how apologetics should be handled. The five positions were: William Lane Craig (classical); Gary Habermas (evidential); Paul Feinberg (cumulative); John Frame (presuppositional); Kelly James Clark (Reformed Epistemological).

However, there were three weak points that I need to point out. First, I'm not sure the debaters were the best representatives of the positions they defended. For instance, Craig could be described as a combination classicist/evidentialist. Much of what he said could have been written by Habermas, as even Habermas admitted. Feinberg had, I believe, the weakest argumentation, as I just never did track with his thoughs. Meanwhile, Frame certainly has his own twist on Van Til's ideas, yet these twists make his position a "kinder, gentler" version of Reformed apologetics and thus is not truly representative of Van Tillians--and there are plenty of these thinkers out there. And Clark might as well let Alvin Plantinga write his section since Clark seemed to mention Plantinga in practically every paragraph.

Second, it is apparent that much of the differences quickly became similarities by the end of the book. In fact, Craig even mentioned how he appreciated the similarities the debaters had. If this is so, then why write the book in the first place? In fact, more than once a respondent to another's position declared, in essence, "Why, that could have been me writing! I think--fill in the name--really is a--fill in the position--like I am." This attitude prevailed through much of the book, especially in the concluding comments. (At the same time, perhaps we should rejoice that in a book of Christian division, so many similarities could be found!)

Finally, I think the book got a little too technical in some areas, especially by several of the writers. I think Craig is a master philosopher, and I've seen Bayes' Theorem before, but I'm still scratching my head trying to understand several pages of formulas he put together to support one of his points. Perhaps with some personal explanation I could better understand, but I'm thinking many reading this book would have been totally lost (as I humbly admit I was). Although I didn't agree with his stance, I thought John Frame did the best in explaining his philosophy in the simplist, most logical way possible.

Despite what I feel are its shortcomings, I do recommend this book for the serious student who is interested in apologetics. I enjoyed it very much and was certainly enlightened about the role apologetics takes in the Christian's life.

Few books have seriously tackled apologetic method, or how Christianity should be defended rationally. The last book I know of that surveyed options in this regard was Gordon Lewis, "Testing Christianity's Truth Claims" (Moody Press, 1976; republished by University Press of America).

This book presents five different approaches, each represented by one of its exponents: Classical Apologetics (William Lane Craig), Evidentialism (Gary Habermas), Culumulative Case Method (Paul Feinberg), Presuppositionalism (John Frame), and Reformed Epistemology (Kelly James Clark).

Much ground is covered concerning the Bible's approach to apologetics, where apologetic arguments should begin, how certain arguments for Christianity are, and so on. I will simply make a few comments.

The presentations by Craig and Habermas are the most worthwhile because they are the most intellectual rigorous and well-documented. They also tend to agree with each on most things and reinforce each others views. While I tend to favor a cumulative case method (influenced by E.J. Carnell and Francis Schaeffer, but with more appreciation for natural theology), Feinberg's comments are the weakest by far. He never mentions the leading exponent of this view in our generation (Carnell) nor Carnell's apt and well-published student (and my esteemed colleague), Dr. Gordon Lewis. Not one word about either one! His comments are brief, his documentation is thin, and he fails to advance anything very creative or helpful, I'm afraid. A better person should have been chosen, such as Gordon Lewis. Frame gives his "kinder, gentler" version of Cornelius Van Til, which still suffers from the same kinds of problems--most notably the fallacy of begging the question in favor of Christianity. Nevertheless, the notion of a "transcendental argument" for theism is a good one, but it should not carry all the weight of apologetics. Clark's material is philosophically well-informed (one would expect this of a student of Alvin Plantinga!), but apologetically timid. Clark almost sounds like a skeptic at times.

A few bones more bones to pick. The editor refers to Francis Schaeffer as a presuppositionalist. This is false; he was a verificationist with more in common with Carnell than with Van Til. Gordon Lewis's fine essay on Schaeffer's apologetic method in "Reflections on Francis Schaeffer" makes this very clear. None of the writers address the great apologetic resources found in Blaise Pascal. I also found at least two grammatical errors.

Nevertheless, as a professor of philosophy at a theological seminary who teaches apologetics, I found this volume very helpful and useful. But let's not get so involved in methodological concerns that we fail to go out in the world and defend our Christian faith as objectively true, existentially vital, and rationally compelling (Jude 3)!

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Philosophy Denver Seminary

For Evan Thomas to remind readers that John Paul Jones was his own worst enemy, that his vanity, ego and ambition rivaled those of the preening Alexander Hamilton is unnecessary and an understatement. John Paul Jones was, as much as the knowledge pained him, a glory hound. He was also one of the bravest, most skilled and dashing officers in the services of the United States during the Revolutionary War, and Thomas brings the cantankerous, manic-depressive little bulldog to vivid life for today's historians, history buffs and armchair adventurers. The highest highs and lowest lows of Jones's life toss, exalt, thrill, and lurch the reader like an unpredictable sea, and what a wonderful voyage it is!

John Paul Jones is the latest "self-made man" to appear in a biography, following on the heels of Willard Sterne Randall's cumbersome yet well-rendered "Alexander Hamilton: A Life." From humble roots, the son of a Scottish gardener, Jones was determined to rise from under the oppression of the European class system. He gazed out across the magnificent gardens created by his father and saw the ocean, with its seemingly endless horizon -and that is how Jones decided to live the rest of his life: He would expand, grow himself and mold his image anew, as wide as the sea, as broad as the sky.

As much taken with sail and sea as they took him, John Paul Jones was a natural, a gifted sailor who always tried to improve himself, whether his nautical skills, or by reading books to absorb philosophy and seeking the company of men from whom he knew he could learn. Unfortunately, Jones was never able to subdue his passions sufficiently, not sufficiently enough for any self-reflection to temper his sensitivities and thin skin, nor for him to ever cultivate the necessary strengths to achieve his highest ambition: Appointment to the rank of Admiral in the United States Navy. He would have to travel to Russia near the end of his life and enter the service of Catherine the Great to achieve that rank, but as fundamentally flawed and blameful as Jones was, he was not a rank human being. He was steadfast, loyal to his adopted country, America, and never gave in to the easy profit of privateering or ever turned his back on the Stars and Stripes.

He was as big-hearted and melodramatic as he was tragic and romantic, a sometimes womanizer who barely had a head for wine and never drank hard liquor. Like Thomas Jefferson, Jones was a paragon of paradox and yet always was, in the best sense, an American patriot.

It's painful to look on, page after page, reading about Jones's exploits and ideas, tactics and tales, only to see him constantly self-destruct, eventually alienating every single person around him. Nonetheless, Jones knew how to fight in an age where most men achieved rank through connections and lineage, and even though he didn't always win, he won enough: Jones was a tonic for fledgling America, and any other person or power savvy enough to employ his courage.

Sadly, Jones was far from the best judge of character, and often found himself in an impossibly frustrating, nightmarish circumstance because of his own inability to discern veneer from character, though Jones seems to have had plenty of character, and yet constantly coveted superficial laurels of those less worthy. But no matter how badly he may have comported himself, and in spite of how myopic most of his handlers were, blinded to Jones's full potential, "Little Jones" was indeed a mouse that roared.

Whether Jones ever knew it during his life, he certainly reflected the rigid principles of honor to which he held himself and others, and Evan Thomas has written a flowing, absorbing book about John Paul Jones, a man who cherished freedom above all else, and helped bring it to so many others.

Author Evan Thomas's account of the life of John Paul Jones is an excellent narrative historical biography that brings to life yet another colorful personality from the American Revolution. Like his contemporary, Alexander Hamilton, Jones was a vain, contentious and controversial figure of humble origins who rubbed many of those who knew him the wrong way. He also happened to be a rare and valuable commodity in Revolutionary America in that he was a man who actually knew how to fight.

As Thomas dramatically illustrates, Jones was virtually the only captain among the Americans to have any success against the Royal Navy. Jones's raids against the British home isles and his daring defeats in two diferent battles against Royal Navy battleships made him famous world wide. Thomas's detailed accounts of the naval battles are particularly gripping. And while Jones most likely never said the famous words, "I have not yet begun to fight," that does not detract from his heroic refusal to surrender his ship in what was perhaps the bloodiest naval battle of the age of sail.

Thomas tracks Jones's entire life, from his childhood as the son of a Scottish gardner, to his time as a merchant ship captain through his Revolutionary exploits to the last, bizarre chapter in his life when he became an Admiral in the Russian fleet against the Turks. Thomas is evenhanded in his descriptions of Jones, detailing his many faults in addition to his triumphs. In the end, the picture that emerges is of an essentially noble individual whose insecurities made him his own worst enemy. At just over 300 pages of narrative, the book is a relatively quick read and also has plenty of illustrations.

Overall, an outstanding historical biography that should be enjoyed by history buffs and even by more casual readers.

John Paul was the son of a Scottish gardener, born in 1747. With little fortune, no prospects of getting an education, and facing a rigid hierarchy he could not break, his prospects of doing anything else than his father's career were unlikely. The one limited prospect of advancement was going to sea, which he did at age 13. It was his place to excel; he was careful, deliberate, and punctiliously neat. His flight to success worked; even though he had to change his name while he was on the run for a murder charge, John Paul Jones can be counted as one of the Founding Fathers. In the biography _John Paul Jones: Sailor, Hero, Father of the American Navy_ (Simon and Schuster), Evan Thomas has insightfully examined Jones's ambitious climb, and the other side of ambition's coin, his vanity, which halted the climb from going as far as Jones had aimed. In balancing both sides, Thomas has produced a model biography of America's most famous sailor.

John Paul had to work the lowest levels in the Royal Navy, sailing slave ships. In 1774, he killed a mutinous sailor off Tobago, and his career was over. He fled to Virginia as John Paul Jones. His timing was fortunate; by 1775 the Continental Congress had a starting fleet and needed officers; he was commissioned as a first lieutenant. Jones proved to be one of the few in the navy who had a strategic vision, one which was recommended by a novelty transcending the orderly set-piece battles between ships: terrorism. It is perhaps discomforting to think of Jones as a terrorist, but he realized that war could be waged against cities and peoples, not just against professional fighters. The British had counted on the Royal Navy to keep them safe in their homes, and Jones breeched the shield. His daring touched on English anxiety about piracy, and he was often depicted as a pirate. More importantly, the English started wondering if warring to keep their colonies was really worth it. He won special fame for action against the new, copper-clad frigate _Serapis_. He was not, however, justly rewarded by his country. He was denied the rank of admiral because of the machinations of his fellow captains. His suspiciousness and irascibility did not recommend him, even though his courage and seamanship did. He took the only job he could get when the Revolution was over, in the Russian navy, but in 1792, possibly weakened by care and by years of exposure to the elements, he died lonely and forgotten in Paris. He had a small funeral, and then oblivion. Eventually a laundry was built over the graveyard.

Jones was resurrected in 1905; the young President Teddy Roosevelt needed a naval hero, and being a naval historian himself, he knew how the country had slighted its first great sailor. "Every officer in our navy should know by heart the deeds of John Paul Jones," the President orated at the time. Jones was put at final rest in a magnificent marble sarcophagus beneath the transept of the Naval Academy Chapel. It would have been just what he wanted: "My desire for fame is infinite," he admitted. Jones would not be so proud of Evan's fine biography, for it makes plain the egotism; John Adams called him "leprous with vanity." For a Founding Father, he had little to say about the importance of democracy and equality, although he wrote plenty against tyranny. But Evans's biography also makes plain Jones's courage, and explains well the successes that Jones the striver was able to gain. It is a thorough and thoroughly entertaining picture of a fascinating figure.

With this crystal-clear reference, networking professionals can cut through the complexities and gain a thorough understanding of the features and functions used to successfully configure Cisco routers. This book includes step-by-step coverage of how to create router configuration files from scratch and build multiprotocol networks from TCP/IP to OSPF and BGP plus traffic management techniques for AppleTalk, IPX, SMDS, and ATM Configuration.

Not only is this book great as an on-the-job reference, but it also prepares you for Cisco certification by presenting all the fundamental concepts and commands in an easy-to-understand text.

This book will provide sample scenarios for novices using the Cisco IOS for configuration, operation, and maintenance of internetworking devices. The book will focus on the three most popular networking protocols used today: TCP/IP, IPX, and AppleTalk. This book covers the commonly used IOS commands and the most popular options, making clear the use of the IOS for a variety of users and internetworking configuration.

Starting off this book is 25 pages just covering the OSI model and then 55 pages on router configuration and both are very good. Moving along to TCP/IP addressing is given fair coverage, needing more coverage of the CIDR topic.

Ammann then tackles RIP and RIP2, OSPF, BGP, IGRP and EIRGP protocols and each are broken down and explained very well. This is the first book I have seen that actually breaks down IPX Addressing with any clarity. Along with IPX addressing is NLSP, IPXWAN and IPX traffic coverage making a complete sweep of the protocol. Ammann again amazes me with his 100 pages on the AppleTalk Protocol and his explanations are extremely complete, yet easy enough to comprehend.

There is also discussion on the following topics, X.25, frame relay, ATM, ISDN and DDR. Finally the author gives you 55 pages on bridging and bridging concepts. Written by a CCNA, this book covers far more than the basic CCAN topics and should be used in Cisco certification exam.

These were written at a time when book length stories were rare. These stories take place on a larger scale than the average comic story and it is a treat to see all of those great heroes in the same story. The main problem with these stories is the use of Snapper Carr, the mascot. What on earth were they thinking about at the time? He is without a doubt one of the most irritating characters ever created. No, he did not make the stories even the slightest bit more accessible to me.

I read the 6th Volume most recently, but this review might apply to the entire JLA ARCHIVES series. The stories in the series improve a bit as time goes on, but the difference from volume to volume is barely perceptible.

You'll have trouble finding a more colorful and bizarre collection of popcorn-science-fiction concepts in any novel or collection of stories; not in comics, not in Larry Niven or in Isaac Asimov, none of those guys. The characters and dialog may seem awkward and stilted (even by the standards of 1960's comics writing), but the inherent weirdness and originality blazes right on through.

With the possible exception of Stan Lee, Gardner Fox is the single most influential writer in American comics. In addition to the Justice League, he created The Flash, The Atom, Hawkman, and the 1940's Justice Society of America (and numerous others I can't think of right now). Along with editor Julius Schwartz, he revamped most of those characters in the late 1950's to create what we call the Silver Age of comics. A list of Fox's literary successors includes comics writers Cary Bates, Mark Waid, and Grant Morrison.

Mike Sekowsky's artwork is perfectly suited to represent the various alien worlds and super-science characters that recur throughout the stories, even if his superheroes usually look a little off (except Wonder Woman).

This book reprints The Brave and the Bold 28-30, which introduced the Justice League, and Justice League of America 1-6. Nine classic stories from the dawn of the Super Heroes as we know them today. Trying to buy all these issue seperately would drain your wallet, but together in a handsome volume, they are a deal for any classic comic collector!
(Note: This review is for Vol 1, not Vol 2. For some reason, it shows up under both)

I read this book about 18 years ago after my pastor recommended it to me. I was in my early 20's and had been experiencing recurring depresssions since my middle teens. I had been suicidal numerous time (e.g., sitting on edge of cliff more than once). I read this book along with my wife and for the first time in my life realized that I was making choices that brought my depression and that I could make other choices that would lead to happiness. I began making those choices and I haven't suffered from a prolonged severe depression since that time. I have now found out that my entire family for 4 generations suffers from depression. This book helped break this in me and I will share it with other members of my family. I recommend it to anyone suffering from depression and or living with anybody who is.

When I was told to purchase this book, I thought 'Happiness is a Choice' ... yeah right, like I CHOOSE to be depressed, I don't think soooo! I didn't think the book would be worth while at all. In fact, I thought it might try to brainwash or something. But that is not how it works. It gives you insight into depression. It gave me so much to think about. It gave me CONTROL over my depression for the first time. It didn't happen overnight, in fact it didn't happen until about a month after I finished reading the book. But the concepts put forth in this book were so profound, that I was able to say NO to depression for the first time, and after many many years of therapy and medication.

I have been suffering from depression and anxiety for many years and am on medication. This book has helped me understand some of the aspects of what triggers anxiety and the choice I can make to control my responses. A person of faith will highly regard this book. The applications can be useful for every day stress that causes anxiety and mild depresseion that everyone is subject to.

This book describes in a very detailed way all the general theories of economics concerning trade. It is very well done as there are many examples and it is optically inspiring. Your eyes won't get tired too quickly, as the layout is done fine. The content of the book is fine, a good book for students of economics, even though it is advisable to read more down the line. But for the overview of a topic it serves allright.

Krugman and Obstfeld provide a full detailed analysis and examples for the basis of trade among nations. It is relatively straightforward to comprehend for both economists and noneconomists.

International trade is an important component of economic policy for the growth and development of countries. This book examines various theoretical trade models and provides real world examples of policy formulation and their impact. The authors do not take any political positions, thus making their analysis a purely objective, or positive study.

I would highly recommend this book to students interested in doing research in international trade and development. It is a must read for prospective international economists. Noneconomists might also find it as a useful reference.

For anybody - but especially students - interested in exploring the subject of international economics, this is the book to start with. It is illuminating (as it is always the case with Krugman's writings) on otherwise technical concepts as comparative advantage, trade policy and exchange rate determinants, but it is also entertaining, with its "reality checks". The first part of the book deals with the "real" economy, the second part with monetary international economics. It will save you a lot of time to begin your study of the field with this book. If you have had previous experiences with international economics but either forgot most about it or had trouble making sense of the whole thing you will probably get a good grasp of the subject after reading this manual. The bibliography is accurate and rich, the exercises won't give you an headache. Readers with some background in economics are most likely to take full advantage from the book. For the others, well, some introductory economics will be necessary. Once you've read this book, you can continue more safely your studies/readings on international economics.