This book I found rather disappointing. It is DEFINITELY for the beginner. So much that most information is nearly copied from all the help information provided during the installation process itself.

If you are a beginner I would not recommend buying this book. Look for something else!!

This book was very easy to follow, but I didn't learn very much that wasn't already available in the Linux documentation.

When I got this book, I had already been using UNIX at work. I just needed some guidance in installing Linux the first time at home. This book proved to be too shallow for me.

I started my server with this book and the man pages that it suggested helped a little. It does not have the heavier network admin information that you need once you get running. If you are trying to configure multiple nic's, sendmail, web hosting or any of the standard things, you need to get something else. But if you want to set up a basic network, this is the best starter book i have used.

Definitely not for novice developers, this book presents a respectable starting point for OOAD practices. Though some text/techniques did look dated; the approach, deliverables, phases were well covered and can definitely be used for mid-sized OO projects. The phases are well-explained alongwith important elements like pragmatic issues, entry-exit criteria.

For those attempting to bring more structure to their development process, this book's utility can be enhanced with knowledge of design patterns, and previous OOAD experience. One can certainly modify / improve the various deliverables covered in the book to their own needs.

I do wish for a better title and singular focus on UML, now that it is a standard. The code listings can surely be reduced and made more up-to-date. Some basic Java dev guidelines (like package names in lowercase) have been ignored.

The title of this book appears to be misleading. It really discusses an approach or "SLDC" process for OO. This should be apparent to anyone that looks at the cover because the "side bar" states what it covers. The Preface also states that it presents a framework for OO methodologies.

For organizations new to OO, this book provides an excelent "how to". You can even take the inside cover and put in a project tool like MS project!

As the authors state, it is like a cook book and after you try it, you can modify the recipe to suite your environment.

The structure of the book is excellent. The information was very well presented.

I highly recommend this book.

I agree with Bruce Arbuckle that this is an excellent book, and also that the title is somewhat misleading. The feature that drain@yahoo.com from Los Angeles, California complained about ("The rest of the book is full of home-brewed project duties and diagramming (CCDs, CCCDs, STDs, PID! s, PADs, & CIDs") I found to be an asset! Whether you are a veteran OO developer or manager, or a novice at OOA/OOD there is plenty here to borrow and put to use in developing your own style and methodology. Rarely is a complex subject like this covered so thoroughly and with such attention to detail.

Textel and Williams provide a cookbook which can be followed to the letter, or which you can modify to satisfy your own OO sensibilities. I particularly found the continual contrasting and comparing of Booch, OMT, and UML to be interesting and edifying.

The Project Management spreadsheet was an unexpected bonus. By following the phases described in this book step by step, producing the recommended deliverables, and using the review items for each phase, anyone with half a brain could successfully manage an OO project -- even someone in management! :-)

it was long boring and down right stupid dont get it

Many, many illustrations and excellent text make this a must-read for any devotee of New Mexico and Taos painting. I have a copy of the author's bought in a used book store; Amazon lists it as 'limited availability', so if interested you ought to order one soon.

I was inspired by the compilation of bird dog stories found within this book. If you enjoy the excitement, fear, despair, and elation associated with the training, ownership and running of all breeds of bird dogs, you will enjoy this book. The authors help you relive the moments you have endured with your own dogs in addition to helping you imagine the hunts you have yet to experience. This is a definite must read for bird dog enthusiasts.

I borrowed this book from a friend and had a tough time putting it down. Great stories from writers who truly love their dogs. A few of the essays are sad, but all of them allow us to share a part of a fellow dog lovers life with his best friend. Definitely a must read.

Charles Williams' writing has been described as being like 'clotted glory': something that has value to say but is muddled in the communication. His obscurity and lack of clarity are just a little too much for this book to be successful, and I recommend looking to other writers for enlightenment on this issue.

I know of no Christian writer whose approach to Christian ideas is more likely to break old familiar patterns than his. William's striking insights far outweigh the defects in style--and his approach is not easily found elsewhere, making his work invaluable to those who hope to explore traditional material in fresh ways.

I was really disappointed with this book. Every step of the way I had to refer to some other book or to the internet for resources. I found it to be very unclear as well as not very thorough...

I thought this book walked through some of the more obscure configuration issues of RH 6.1 pretty well. I liked the fact they actually had screenshots of the installation and I really liked the chapter on compiling the kernel.

Overall this proves to be a useful volume. It's the type that is nice to check out of the library, but it isn't necessarily one essential to your collection. A note about its title, it means what it says. This volume neither discusses the Arab state nor the Islamist opposition. Rather, it examines the in-between of the two, usually meaning secular liberals. For this reason, it is a much appreciated volume with the books on Islamic fundamentalism and the non-democratic regimes approaching infinity. If you're interested in exploring this aspect of society in the Middle East, this book comes highly recommended. Overall, its essays are written with solid scholarship.

I have a used copy from a 1978 reprint. Hardcover, 8.5" by 11", 230 pages, 105 b&w photos, 76 illustrations.

The author was a professor at Oxford University and the text & pictures are from a 1924-1925 trip thru southern England.

Thorough historical coverage. The book is more of a study of the history of the castles. The pictures are rather dull and small or old-looking.

My only complaint about this play is that Shakespeare should have had some dialogues where the characters discussed crucial history before the play opens. Gloucester (murdered or dead before the play but mentioned several times) had tried to usurp Richard's crown too many times. History itself is not sure if Gloucester died or was murdered. Bolingbroke for a while conspired with Gloucester and now sees another oppurtunity to usurp the crown.The virtuous John of Gaunt served Richard with honor and integrity and eventually moved parliament into arresting Gloucester for treason. This would of made John of Gaunt's rages all the more valid. Otherwise this play is outstanding! Richard shows himself to be capable of ruling at times, but gains our contempt when he seizes his the honorable John of Gaunt's wealth. John of Gaunt's final rage in 2.1 is a passage of immense rageful beauty. Also, Shakespeare moves us into strongly suspecting that Richard had Gloucester murdered. However, despite Richard's crime, Shakespeare masterfully reverses our feelings and moves us into having deep pity for Richard when he is deposed. The Bishop of Carlisle (Richard's true friend) provides some powerful passages of his own. I can not overestimate the grace in which Shakespeare increases our new won pity for Richard when Bolingbroke (Gaunt's rightful heir) regains his wealth and the death of Gloucester is left ambiguous. 5.1, when Richard sadly leaves his queen and can see that Henry IV and his followers will eventually divide is a scene of sorrowful beauty. 5.4 is chilling when Exton plots Richard's murder. 5.5 is chilling and captivating when Richard dies but manages to take two of the thugs down with him. The icing on the cake is that Bolingbroke (Henry IV) can only regret his actions and realize that he has gotten himself into a troublesome situation. But that will be covered in "1 Henry IV" and "2 Henry IV." We can easily argue that it is in "Richard II" where we see Shakespeare's mastery of the language at its finest.

The thing with Shakespeare histories is that almost no one reads them, as opposed to his tragedies and comedies. I don't know why that is. The histories that are read are either Henry V (largely due to Branagh's movie), Richard III (because the hunchback king is so over-the-top evil), or the gargantuan trilogy of Henry VI, with the nearly saintly king (at least by Part III) who much prefers contemplating religion and ethics to ruling and dealing with the cabals among his nobles.

So why read a relatively obscure history about a relatively obscure king? Aside from the obvious (it's Shakespeare, stupid), it is a wonderful piece of writing - intense, lyrical, and subtle. Richard II is morally ambiguous, initially an arrogant, callous figure who heeds no warnings against his behavior. Of course, his behavior, which includes seizing the property of nobles without regard for their heirs, leads to his downfall. Nothing in his character or behavior inspires his subjects so he has no passionate defenders when one of the wronged heirs leads a rebellion to depose Richard II. But Richard now becomes a much more sympathetic figure -especially in the scene where he confronts the usurper, Richard acknowledges his mistakes, but eloquently wonders what happens when the wronged subjects can depose the leader when they are wronged. What then of the monarchy, what then of England?

On top of the profound political musings, you get some extraordinarily lyrical Shakespeare (and that is truly extraordinary). Most well known may be the description of England that was used in the airline commercial a few years back... "This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle, ..."

If you like Shakespeare and haven't read this play, you've missed a gem.

Richard II was incompetent, wastefully extravagant, overtaxed his nobles and peasants, ignored his senior advisors, and lavished dukedoms on his favorites. His rival, Henry of Bolingbroke (later Henry IV), was popular with the common man and undeservingly suffered banishment and loss of all his property. And yet two centuries later Elizabethans viewed the overthrow of Richard II as fundamentally wrong and ultimately responsible for 100 years of crisis and civil war. Queen Elizabeth's government even censored Shakespeare's play.

Shakespeare masterfully manipulates our feelings and attitude toward Richard II and Bolingbroke. We initially watch Richard II try to reconcile differences between two apparently loyal subjects each challenging the other's loyalty to the king. He seemingly reluctantly approves a trial by combat. But a month later, only minutes before combat begins, he banishes both form England. We begin to question Richard's motivation.

Richard's subsequent behavior, especially his illegal seizure of Bolingbroke's land and title, persuades us that his overthrow is justified. But as King Richard's position declines, a more kingly, more contemplative ruler emerges. He faces overthrow and eventual death with dignity and courage. Meanwhile we see Bolingbroke, now Henry IV, beset with unease, uncertainty, and eventually guilt for his action.

Shakespeare also leaves us in in a state of uncertainty. What is the role of a subject? What are the limits of passive obedience? How do we reconcile the overthrow of an incompetent ruler with the divine right of kings? Will Henry IV, his children, or England itself suffer retribution?

Richard II has elements of a tragedy, but is fundamentally a historical play. I was late coming to Shakespeare's English histories and despite my familiarity with many of his works I found myself somewhat disoriented. I did not appreciate the complex relationships between the aristocratic families, nor what had happened before. Fortunately I was rescued by Peter Saccio, the author of "Shakespeare's English Kings". Saccio's delightful book explores how Shakespeare's imagination and actual history are intertwined.

I hope you enjoy Richard II as much as I have. It is the gateway to Henry IV (Parts 1 and 2) and Henry V, all exceptional plays.

I make specific what book this is a review of, because if you look at the user reviews for Shelly Taylor & D. Sears' social psychology textbook, you will find the exact same 5 reviews as are below mine. Either Amazon or some user are up to something sneaky.

Despite the comments below, which may or may not reflect someone who has actually read or used the book, my comments are based on using this book when I took the course and ordering it for a course I am teaching this summer.

Regarding the infractions cited below, I have not found this text any worse than others. It covers a wide range of an exciting subfield of psychology, and it does so in a way accessible to an initiate to the field. Allyn and Bacon provide excellent support for the text, as well.

Finally, I wish to note that while I am currently working in the same Psychology department as Donn Byrne, the second author, we are not affiliated in any way.

I highly recommend "Social Psychology" to practically any adult who can read. We are social beings and understanding each other helps us to create better relations. A better world. This book is excellent to examine and understand not only others' behavior but also ours.

Here is an excerpt that caught my attention: "how we interpret, analyze, remember, and use information about the social world-suggests that we are far from perfect in our ability to think clearly about other persons and reach accurate decisions or judgments about them."

"Social Psychology" covers many branches of psychology but the chapters give you enough information to learn just the basics. I think that this is great for lay people or new students in Psychology. I found that the personal stories that both authors used, helped me to better understand the topic of the chapters; however the, I met this psychologist and have been friends with since, led me to believe that this reaction was due to a schema. Perhaps our society has created a schema in which others' names define who we are. I particularly don't sympathize much with this.

The colorful pictures and cartoons in the book, I enjoyed greatly. I tend to be very visual in many occasions. In fact, I feel that many of the pictures were more thought provoking than the text. I found them very helpful to understand the subject. I also sensed that the targeted audience was mainly young students since many of the studies were conducted or focused on young students. I just wished that the authors had not forgotten that there are older people (like this book reviewer) who go back to school or who want to learn about social psychology. Once again, I highly recommend this book to anyone. You'll learn to view the world under a new perspective.

I read several chapters from this book before I took a social psychology course, and saw that it was indeed very helpful. The author uses a lot of examples, which makes the concepts understandable. Also, the narrative text of the book is very high in quality according to me. It's pure, understandable, friendly and in harmony. (Look at the Franzoi's 1st edition: You will understand what I mean by no-harmony). I strongly believe that to write such a good book should have taken much time for the author. In addition, the author most probably had had an empathetic approach to understand the needs of the student and write accordingly. I don't mean to harm or criticize in any way those that made negative comments on this book. Nevertheless, let me convey you my opinion. According to me, using "I", the author only intended to provide a warm atmosphere to the student sharing his experiences and understandings. But, this is a way to encourage the student think of his/her own experiences in real life, which causes the assimilation of the knowledge more effectively. It's not to advertise himself(author), as far as I perceived from the book. Another thing is that, in psychology, phenomena that seem not logical to a human eye may be significant in a statistical sense. Very small differences, after the elimination of the error margin, may still be significant and therefore, meaningful. In the book, there are graphs not starting from the 0 point, and thus the difference may appear larger when looking superficially. Nonetheless, when looking carefully, undoing the illusory magnification, still the difference is observed, and I believe that the author made focus on the significant part of the graph to draw the attention of the reader and to make him understand better and easier. According to me, this is a good feature of the book and intention of the author.