This book tells the story of a cattle drive from the Rio Grande to Montana in 1882. It was written in 1903 by a former cowboy who gives us a clear and candid picture of the hardships of the cattle drive. The book provides insights into the strengths and weaknesses, the good points and bad points of the men we call Cowboys. In additon to telling the story of the hardships of the trail, the book gives us samples of the tales told around the campfire at the end of the long day. Recommended reading for anyone with an interest in the Old West; required reading for anyone who wants to write Westerns.

This book is a lot of fun to read, taking the reader back in time to a late-1800s cattle drive from Texas to Montana. The book is written well with spare prose, wit and exceptional details about a cowboy's often difficult and sometimes boring life on the trail. There's refreshingly little of the syrup found in so many western stories. It's written simply enough for pre-teens interested in the west, yet it will yield a lot of enjoyment for the seasoned reader.

I think that this book is really fun because Adam Joshua cheats on his math test by making someone else do it for him so he can finish his science project. In the book they take away the skeleton they have in the science room and . . . read more to find out what happens!

I think that Serious Science is a good book for a lot of kids. It might be a little hard for people and it might be a little easy for people. But, it's perfect for me!

Brief but good. The author comtemplates the so-called "smith problem", which is much less of a problem to those who have actually read and understood Smith. The problem being: in 1759 Smith wrote Theory of Moral Sentiments, charging that reason is not at the core of human action. Rather, one's own moral sense is what one intially turns to to provide moral judgement. In 1776 Smith wrote Wealth of Nations, which is ignorantly considered by some to be a libertarian apology for greedy businessman and their market economy. This 'problem' rests on those assumptions: some of which are false. Smith maintains throughout his work that commercial society is the best way to allocate the most amount of prosperity and liberty to the most amount of people, its (as he admits) many dark sides notwithstanding. The author's thesis, nonetheless, is interesting: that instead of trying to defend the market economy, Smith was actually defending the Old Whigs. Hmm, food for thought. One thing's for sure: regardless of Smith's motives, capitalism and the market have given man opulence and liberty beyond that which any other system could deliver.

Susan Gallagher's very brief work on Adam Smith provides fresh insight into the moral anxieties inspired by the rise of capitalism. The book is clearly written, thoughtfully argued, and surprisingly entertaining. While some readers might be upset by Gallagher's somewhat lighthearted tone, The Rule of the Rich? provides a welcome contrast to the dull perspectives one usually encounters in books on the history of social and political thought.

Of all of the thousands of books that it has been my unabashed plewasure to read, peruse, study, adjudicate, commit to memory, and just plain read for the pure single-minded pleasure of self-edification...there has been no equal to this incredibly piquant, pleasant, and informative little tome. Ms. Gallagher's lets you know right off the bat that you are in the prescence of the almost phosphorescent desidera of sheer heart-breaking genius. Not "MENSA" genius, not "Phi Beta Kappa" genius, not "Bohemian Grove" genius, but the genius of "the Apostles," of the High Tables of Oxbridge, or "Le Ecole Normale Superieur." Ms. Gallagher is a super-nova streaking across the intellectual firmament at the moment. Her career can only end up in Stockholm with a Nobel, which Sartresque I am sure she will turn her back on. There is a kind of Wittgensteinian conciseness and sheer didactic flair to her understanding of Adam Smith and the inter-related greats of his era which stymies the limited imagination and intellect of this reader and vexes him whole. Kudos, Ms. Gallagher, absolute kudos for you have walked the camel through the eye of the needle and I can only envy the trajectory of your intellectual future. Thank you so much for your fundamental work. I am a fan forever and will follow your career until that inevitable day. Thank you.

This is an excellent book for getting up to speed quickly on GL 6. I would not call it for the advanced user, but it's excellent for beginners or intermediates with Golive. The tutorials are clear and concise, and the book is exactly what it advertises itself to be - it gets right to the point.

I wish there was also a good advanced book on GoLive that covered using scripting such as Java and CSS and dynamic content in detail, unfortunately there are none yet that are any good. Maybe Sams can do that too? But for beginners or intermediates with GL 6 who want to start using the software today, this is the book to get!

I found this book to be a very good introduction to Web design using Golive 6. The lessons are short but well presented, they are fast, and they can be used immediately to my own practice projects. Although the GoLive interface seemed so unassuming when you first open the program, it can get filled up quickly once you begin working. The authors made sure that you don't get lost amidst the plethora of palletes. There is also the confidence that I am reading the work of competent Golive designers who can actually communicate what they know and teach an unknown audience cleverly. Sam's formula, if I may venture a guess works well for this book: plain English, competent authors, short but lively presentation and an exciting software. In only a few hours, I was already making my own web pages and amazed my friends. This book is a very good start in Web design using Golive 6. It is one of my best and most useful books!

I had never used GoLive before and was kind of freaked out when I first opened the program. Then I went to an Adobe seminar and one of the authors of this book was a presenter. He was really excellent and knowledgeable, so I decided to buy the book. I'm glad I did! I've now created two Websites and am starting my third. This time I'm getting paid! I know I still have a lot to learn, but this book got me up and running FAST. The best thing about GoLive is the way it works with my Photoshop files. If you haven't used this yet, check out the convert to banner trick!!!! Saves you tons of time!!!!!

Topic is fairly intriguing, especially Burnham's expert knowledge on issues of self-interest, but writing itself is overall clunky and dull. You find yourself wishing for more spark, warmth and humor in place of the cold, arid, repetitive fact-spewing.

While the economics profession has its head in the clouds, Professor Burnham's focus is on the ground floor (or perhaps even the basement). His paradigm for understanding the underlying source of our economic preferences is highly illuminating. Interestingly, it supplants the widely-held view in the field that tastes should be taken as exogenously determined. Rather than falling from the sky, however, Dr. Burnham describes the genetic underpinnings of our preferences, and the tug-of-war that often results. I highly encourage others to read this provocative text, and to follow Burnham as he continues to articulate his profound insights in other volumes. Stay tuned. There's more to learn from this teacher and synthesizer of various strands of scientific thought.

115 years ago one of the two most important works in evolutionary biology was written, yet it remained unknown for 30 years, as biologists groped along in the dark. Economists are today doing the same thing, while the Mendel of their field lays unread. This book needs to be read by all who find the current state of economics to be unrealistic in its assumptions about human behavior. We have been groping in the dark too long. Don't let 30 years go by, when the truth is available to us today.

Two hundred years ago capitalism was really beginning to take over as the dominant economic system. Capitalism was at the time a system allowing an economic and scientific growth, much faster than under the feudal systems, and played a progressive role. However capitalism led to a new kind of oppression of the working class. Adam Smith gave the bourgoise a theory stating that their oppression of the working class was for the common good of all mankind, thus serving as an apology for oppression.

This book is a lousy apology. Capitalism is an old-fashioned economic system, ready to become buried on the scrapyard of history. Workers of all countries, Unite!

This Book is a classic. I would not go so far as to add it to the western Canon, but it contains the foundations of modern Economics. Its explaination for how economies work is still unsurpassed. Division of Labour, the invisible hand of consumer demand and the uses and mis-uses of taxation are all here. It should be stressed however, that this edition does not include books IV and V which concern the proper role of govt. It is also the section most ideologues forget to read and contains all the rudiments for a minimal welfare state and and active role for govt. in planning FOR competition, NOT the planning OF competition --- a very important distinction and one lost on those who see no positive role for the state in the economy.

It is unfortunately most used as a classic for those seeking a rationale for exploitation. Smith did not intend it as such and to see it as that is indeed to read it very selectively. The invisible hand is a useful interpretation for demand economics, but it is, like all other things only a description of market forces as they operate. It is not always the best way to organise everything as modern day ideologues would presuppose. It is of course the basis of business --- and it should be --- but Smith also has lots to say about how other economic factors operate in society.

One thing to make clear is this: Smith is not anti-State, as some ideologues in the US would like to think. He is balanced in his view of the state --- it is best left out of economic planning --- but it does clearly have an important role to play. The role of the State is to

1) create the conditions for the smooth flow of capital and its allocation into its most efficient uses and not to erect barriers in the process.

2) It also must necessarily collect taxes since the smooth and efficient operation of the state and the benefits its provide is in the interest of the accumulation of Capital.

3) The State also directly participates in the economy when projects which are obvious to the public benefit, but "which to no one would accrue an economic profit" --- he offers such examples as lighthouses and some roads and defence --- areas where there is an obvious public good, but to which no one would make a profit. Lighthouses are good examples, but like everything else in today's economy an interpretation for this could be made for universal health care and, of course, education; the mere fact that people do not have to worry about providing for education or health allows them to carry on in amassing capital in other endevours. Of course there is a slippery logic here but such is the rationale for the limited, but much greater role, the state provides in most developed economies outside of the United States.

4) Taxation policy is here as well. In the last book, Book V (not included in this edition), Smith describes the foundation of taxation and where it works best. He starts with the idea that "those who benefit the most from the smooth functioning of the state, should also be the ones who pay more." While not a prescription for progressive taxation policies it is the right way to think about tax and certainly would never excuse preferential taxation policies for the rich (such as in the US) but could be used as a foundation for a universal flat tax.

Such a tax is perhaps the best, but as Smith points out, where and how to collect it is always the difficulty. He comes out more or less in favour of a consumption tax policy since it would approximate the wealth the people earn in the first place and would not, for example overburden companies or people with high income taxes when they may not have high earnings.

There is however little in here about social policy, but Smith does see it as the right of the State to, in his time, provide welfare in the guise of work houses (19th Century hell holes). But that was as good as public welfare got in those days so we can posit that Smith would have carried his logic somewhat forward and provided for some social programmes --- though the extent of them would be a subject of no doubt fierce debate.

Overall a book that every thinking person should have on their shelf. Like most things it has some warts over time, but it is still the logical Tome on which capitalism rests its bones. Not until Marx did someone really challenge its dictates --- Smith basically won the argument on most points. But willingness for those with an inability to think critically, to use this book as justification for the domination of the weak by the strong, has little to do with Smith --- it has everything to do with those who are looking for justification of Greed --- and Gordon Gecko and Adam Smith have little in common.

This is one of the truly great books produced by the Western world. It should be required reading (in an abridged form) for every high school student.

And I can't help feeling that those who pan it as an apology for exploitation simply haven't read it. I'd been told before I read it by several people that AS was, for example, apologizing for the East India Trading Company????????? Does his apology for EIT include the lengthy chapter which discuss in full detail how and why the EIT was responsible for an wide array of abuses in the Far East and how and why not only it, but all other such companies would be illegal in any sane state. If the powers that be had any concern for their own interest, not to mention that of those who are being exploited by them, they would never sponsor such companies. He spends at least 100 pages of his life on that. How can he be accused of apologizing for capitalistic exploitation except by someone who never read the book?

In fact, I can't see how anyone who reads it could view it as an apology at all -- it's simply a statement of fact. Adam Smith is not the one carrying an ideology around on his shoulder. You may not like it that the world works this way -- that's another matter. But that IS the way it works.

And after reading AS, I'm left feeling very happy that that's the way the world works. You can simply feel that this is a book which establishes a field of study. It's completely solid. It's completely sane. And as a result, I feel compassion just welling out of it. I'm left with an undeniable feeling that what really caused AS to get up in the morning and write all these pages was a concern for the common man, combined with an exceedingly clear understanding of how to better his lot. He isn't terribly emotional about it, but every word of criticism in that book is directed against the ruling class who abuse money at the expense of society as a whole.

For if you really do care about the underpriveleged masses -- and it's imminently clear that he really does -- then you better get real about how money works. You better consciously organize your state in such a manner that money will flow where it's most needed. Otherwise you tend to just throw it at whoever barks the loudest, and that's usually those who need it least and know least what to do with it.

And it's a very hopeful book as well, because he offers resounding arguments that the best way to insure that wealth is fairly distributed is to protect man from unfair exploitation by the state but otherwise to leave him completely free to serve his own best interest. He argues that it's stupid to impose sanctions or high tariffs on other countries just because you're mad at them, because that only impoverishes yourself, besides prolonging the antagonism. He argues that the wealthy should bear a heavier tax burden than the poor, and that the poorest should pay no tax at all. At a time when farmers were looked down on as lowly people, he stands firmly at their side, arguing that their work required quite a bit more intelligence than those who were mocking them seemed to have. And besides, they are at the backbone of society -- food is the bottom line, so treat the farmers nice and give them the respect they are due. He speaks highly of their brotherly nature, their willingness to share professional knowhow with their fellow farmers despite the fact that they compete on the market. He argues repeatedly against special interests -- against favoring certain wealthy groups at the expense of society as a whole. I didn't detect a flake of racism or nationalism in all those hundreds of pages -- to a degree that would be enviable in a modern writer, much less a person of his time.

Something remarkable was happening in Scotland during the 18th C -- David Hume, Sir Walter Scott,... (also John Locke in England in the preceding century). What characterizes these writings to my feeling is a capacity to regard the facts of this material world dispassionately and truthfully. There seemed to be both a faith that the truth was in the end good, combined with an unusual capacity to abstract away from passions and ideologies and simply ask yourself "What is true?" No, he doesn't write about the great religious truths, and you sense he isn't much interested in them. But what he writes is in no way inconsistent with a contemplative life, any more than is Newton's Principia.

Someday we'll catch up with him, but we haven't yet.

I am an experienced user of Fortran 77, who is returning to Fortran after several years absence. I qualified as language lawyer for Fortran 77 and could quote chapter and verse of the standard.

The new syntax for Fortran 90/95 is fairly straightforward. I need to no how the new elements of the language inter-relate. For example, when assumed shape arrays are used in a subroutine, an interface definition is required. I tried reading this book before attempting this and could not find the requirement. Even after learning this experimentally and from another book, I still can't locate the requirement in this book. I have had similar experiences with other syntactical inter-relationships.

This book contains a lot of information on Fortran 90/95, but I can't recommend it either as a tutorial or as an advanced reference. Unfortunately, there are no other good alternatives in print and this may be the best of the bunch.

This book covers the complete FORTRAN 95 language definition. The author apparentely intended it as clarifification of the ISO/J3 standard. And that's just what it is. This book even reproduces the complete official F95 grammar in one of its appendices. It has a more-than-complete index, which helps you find what you're looking for most of the time. Don't expect examples in this book; there aren't any.

If you're new to programming and you wish to learn FORTRAN, don't buy this book. You cannot learn the language from it, unless you already have a lot of programming experience in F77 or other languages. If you want to know all the capabilities and limitations of F95, or if you're going to write an F95 compiler, this book has got to be the number one book on your wishlist.

This is not a textbook, but it is an important reference for the Fortran 95 programmer. It covers the features inherited from Fortran 77 as well as the new features in Fortran 90 and 95.

Adam Warren's first DIRTY PAIR comic probably stuck to the way the Lovely Angels were originally concieved based on the novels of Haruka Takachiho. Up until now there has never been a DP manga, and still isn't. This is an American comic book mini-series done by Dark Horse Comics. Actually, this story was first printed by the now defunct Eternity Comics. It was available in graphic novel format before, but this time with a special back-up comic feature with Kei having a simulated fantasy about killing Yuri. In the main story, Kei and Yuri have to protect a genetics expert who's rival has been after him for years and planted his body inside a small rodent. After busting into the bad guy's compound and rescuing him, they help him get a new robotic body while then trying to retrieve his stolen tissue samples so he can clone a new body for himself. This one was alot like the way the Dirty Pair were portrayed back in their old anime series. BIOHAZARD is also one of the only ones of Warren's version that you'll ever see either the Pair's assistant Muhgi who in this one looks more like a large panther than a grizzly bear, and its about the only one that Yuri uses her special "Bloody Card" weapon. It's alot of fun, but they only keep getting better from here on in!

This, the long-awaited reprint of the first American "Dirty Pair" mini-series from 1988 chronicles the adventures of Kei and Yuri, better known as the "Dirty Pair," on the planet Pacifica. Sent there to retake the genetic profile and memory pattern of a recently deceased scientist from his enemies, Kei and Yuri get more than they barganed for when they become involved in a battle between rival illegal biotech weapon manufacturers. Of course, the "Dirty Pair" plus viral weaponry can only equal disaster...

The artwork is primitive compared to the other entries in the series, this being Adam Warren's first professional work, but glimmers of the great comic artist to come can be seen throughout. Besides, bad Warren art is still good art by most standards.

However, the fun story makes "Biohazards" worth your time. Among other insanity, it includes: a truly bizarre romance between Kei and a scientist who happens to be in the body of a genetically engineered warbeast, an extraordinarily polite killer robot, and a bioagent that turns its victims into crazed berzerkers whose entire vocabulary consists of the words "KILL," "HA," "RRRRAAAAARRRR," and "DIE!"

And as a bonus, the VERY difficult to find 1994 "Dirty Pair" short story "I Honestly Hate You" is included in the package.

Recommended, but even though it is the first series, a new reader should start with one of the better "Dirty Pair" adventures published later, so as not to be dissuaded.

Pearl Harbor 1941 is graphically very appealing. If one ignores the first 35 pages and the final few pages, one might even call this an excellent summary. For readers with only a general interest in the Pearl Harbor attack, this volume will suffice, but historians will probably only appreciate the excellent maps and order of battle information. Particularly troubling, given the immense primary and secondary sources available on this subject, is the author's tendency toward misleading and erroneous facts.

The opening introduction and background section is totally inadequate. While the author takes time to mention Hawaii's historical background, he makes less effort to paint the immediate causes of the attack. There is no mention of either the Chinese invasion of China in 1937 that led to the deterioration of US-Japanese relations or the Russo-Japanese border fighting in 1939-40 that shaped Japanese strategic conceptions away from further Eurasian entanglements. The statement that the "US Pacific Fleet was a deterrent" is misleading; that was how FDR viewed it, not the Japanese, who saw it as a threat to their expansionist ambitions in the Pacific. Even Admiral Kimmel, who commanded the Pacific Fleet, felt wholesale transfers of men and vessels to the Atlantic undermined its deterrence value.

The section on opposing commanders is more than a bit rambling and has odd choices of individuals, some of whom were not military commanders involved directly in the campaign. The US section has Kimmel, Short, Stark, Marshall, Hull and FDR. The Japanese section has Yamamoto, Fuchida, Genda, Nagumo and Nomura. Certainly politicians and diplomats such as FDR, Hull and Nomura do not belong here. Noticeably absent are the US air commanders in Hawaii, Bloch and Martin, who certainly bore some responsibility for the defeat. The entry for Nagumo is misleading, implying that he committed suicide at Saigon in 1944 "when the inevitable result of the war became clear." Instead, Nagumo was commander of the naval base on Saipan and committed suicide when US troops overran the island. The entry for Yamamoto that claims he was, "a man who fought but wanted peace" is nauseating. Just what did he ever do for peace? The chronology section, although detailed, is also marked with misleading or erroneous entries, further complicated by the fact that the author does not specify what time zone he is using. For example, he states that the Japanese fleet sailed on 25 November, but local time was actually 26 November. The crucial 27 November "war warning" is falsely delivered as advising Kimmel and Short that negotiations had failed and to "be prepared for any eventuality." It said no such thing.

Although there is a section on the Japanese attack plan, there is no section on US defensive plans or the Rainbow War Plan. The author should have mentioned the Martin-Bellinger studied which addressed the vulnerability of Oahu to air attack. In the Japanese section, there is no mention of the vociferous opposition to the raid and how Yamamoto had to threaten resigning in order to get the operation approved. The whole approach to Japan's strategy is euphemistic: "Japan expanded into Asia..."and the US "thwarted every Japanese attempt to extend Asian influence," instead of, the US sought to contain Japanese aggression. There are many other errors in this section, some so mundane, like claiming that the Japanese task force sailed from "Tankan Bay" instead of Hittokappu bay, that it is a wonder that the author even bothered to peruse secondary sources.

Amazingly, the sections on the actual attack are quite good. To be fair, they are better than Gordon Prange provides in his long-winded At Dawn We Slept. Smith provides excellent maps and graphics for the attacks on each air base and the naval facilities, as well as a decent textual summary. Three-D maps are provided for the first and second wave attacks, as well as the attack on Hickam Field. There is even a map depicting US naval movements in Pearl during the attack, which is most unusual. Several excellent illustrations and many photos complement the text. Overall, these 36 pages that cover the attack (one more page than Prange) are excellent.

Unfortunately, in the aftermath section the author reverts to his misleading tendencies. He claims "all eight [US] battleships [were] sunk or heavily damaged," which is totally wrong. The USS Maryland and Pennsylvania were only slightly damaged and soon available for service, USS Tennessee was moderately damaged. His follow-up conclusions are overly generalized and ignore the immediate affects of the raid.

Overall, this a handy, colorful summary volume, but it should not be used as a substitute for serious history. Unfortunately, the author has taken far too many liberties with the historical record for this to be considered a reliable summary.

An excellent review for the novice as well as the reader well read about the Pearl Harbor attack. Maps and diagrams reveal the placement of each aircraft and ship. This book also does a good job about detailing how severe this battle hurt the US military. Shocking to realize how little strength the US had in the Pacific on Dec. 8, 1941. Highly recommended.

This book is an uninspiring analysis of Smith's work. Nobody who has even a cursory knowledge of Smith's writings would be surprised by what Muller has to say. The basic point that Smith was not a philosopher of unbridled greed is unsurprising. It is not that the thesis of the book is wrong, but it is simply something that could have been said in an article or less. Obviously a lot of hard work went into the book, but it is the product of a mediocre mind.

a very good description of everything

I couldn't disagree more with the review of Max Hayes. It would and does shock people to learn that Adam Smith wasn't primarily an economist as we think of the term. The fact that his work was centered around moral philosophy and making people "decent" is widely unknown and most people have never even heard of The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Robert Heilbroner said it best when he called Smith "the most quoted and least read of the worldly philophers."

This book is not a biography of Smith, which would probably be pretty boring. It is an examination of his ideas. Muller starts by placing the book in its intellectual context of earlier traditions. Than he turns to an examination of Smith's work as a whole. This is important because to often Smith is limited to The Wealth of Nations, which is only one element of his thought. Muller examines The Theory of Moral Sentiments and the Lectures on Jurisprudence to form a more complete picture of Smith as a moral philisopher.

The most important element of this book is the demonstration that Smith was not a defender of unrestrained greed. Smith sought to defend and construct institutions that would channel individual self-interest into benefical results for the whole of society. Nor was he an enemy of government. While it is true that he thought government often proved a danger to the market because of the influence of what we call special interests, Smith did not reject government regulation totally. In fact he argued for regulation of banking and interest rates and advocated using the government to try and correct the negative effects capitalism had on the intellect of the people through public financed education.

Muller writes a compelling book demonstrating that Smith is not the proto-libertarian so many people claim. That in fact Smith would probably be quite dismayed at the uses to which his thoughts have been applied.