This book is just way too basic.

If you had never heard of a network before it might be useful, but even as a relative beginner I found this book to be _way_ too simpleminded.

I like information to be presented in a non-technical, accessible way. This book manages to be irritatingly simplistic and unclear at the same time. Quite a feat.

I was particularly disappointed because I've liked other books in the same series. I really doubt that anyone with any experience (even just surfing the internet) would find this book very useful.

I hope the authors put a lot of effort into improving the next version, if there is another.

I have just finished reading this book.

Ok - I did get some new information, but i am ultimately disappointed.

Please only get it, if you are a complete beginner. I thought that i was a complete network newbie, but I knew most of the information already....

This book gives a very basic understanding of the who's, what's and where's of networking. Have recently signed up for a networking course at the local community college and honestly had no clue about ANYTHING to do with networks. Best used as a primer for what networks are. If you have a good grasp of network basics already, then this book will not be the best buy.

This book should be titled: "An Overview of Programming Internet Solutions With Microsoft Products". It does a good job of explaining the what and the why of things, including DHTML, IIS, scripting, etc. - something that many other books are lacking (especially most reference material). If you're new to internet programming I'd recommend this book as one of the better introductions to the tools that Microsoft has to offer and how they all fit together. If you're looking for a book to teach you ASP programming, this is not it.

This book is a good starting point for beginners as well as a good reference book for more advanced users. Remember, though, that this book is published by MS press, so there is considerable content that is MS proprietary. For example, there are chapters devoted to DHTML, IE 4.0, and ActiveX controls. But these technologies only work if you are developing exclusively for the IE browser, which not many people do. However, the chapter on ASP and the chapter on MTS are very good, but look out for the examples in the ASP chapter, they aren't optimized for larger databases. Plus the first chapter gives a good overview of web development concepts. Overall, a good book.

This book is well written, concise and clear. It provides information on Active Server Pages and all Microsoft's related technologies. The one problem that it has is a misleading title, which caused so many bad reviews here. It is a great primer on Microsoft's new Internet technologies for dynamic web sites. It is self-contained and goal-oriented. Forget the title and get the book for what it actually offers, if that is what you are looking for. You will not be disappointed. Professional ASP is a comprehensive book on ASP but, unfortunately, it lacks the clarity, brevity, and organization that this book has.

When is it going to dawn on writers/Mainlanders running from their mistakes that we in Hawaii don't want them to come here and bring their "baggage" with them? No matter how "at home" you feel, what kind of spiritual moments you think you have here, you will be an outsider until the day you die-preferably somewhere else. Lowell buys into every tourist cliche ever contrived when she misuses famous Hawaiian names and then names her heroine Pele:that alone should be enough to make Kilaeua erupt in indignation. Using the hula for sexual tension and having onstage clinches is another major no-no. Did she do ANY research with local Hawaiians? This is a formula book with the requisite cute meet, sexual tension, sloppy sex, the "bump" when there is a misunderstanding, and the reconciliation. Romance readers should skip it because it appears hurriedly written and poorly edited, not to mention the commodification of Hawaiian culture for a draw, and just plain bad research - I was a fan until read this one. Now it'll be a while before I buy Lowell again and I hope she rewrites this one with more sensitivity to the culture she pillages for material.

I loved the Untamed series and think of Lowell as a pretty good writer in general and a great writer when compared to others in her genre. This book was just plain stupid. Dumb characters, dumb plot, dumb writing! Ok the nookie scenes were up to her usual par, but aside from that it was pretty silly.

I purchased the audio version of this book knowing it was one of the author's earlier books. I've always been a fan of Elizabeth Lowell's and when you compare her early works to her current books I can see the difference in character and plot development. Eden Burning lacks depth, though I do give the author points for trying to incorporate some of the technical aspects during a volcanic eruption. I thought the addition of drums as a sound effect on the cassette was a little silly and distracting as it made me think of cannibals rather than Hawaiian dancing. I felt the book ended too abruptly (at least it did on the audio version, I don't know how it is on the text version) and there was a brief message from the author noting she had revisited the characters and had beefed up the storyline. Some things are best left unvisited, and Eden Burning is one of them. Only the most die hard of Lowell's fans may want to read this and appreciate the literary growth of Lowell's skill in her more recent work.

I would highly recomend that any fan of Guns N'Roses do not buy this book. It is a complete waste of money. The book is boring and pointless. The author just rambles on and on, until you don't even know what he is saying anymore. If you are wanting a good book about Guns N'Roses, this is definately not it.

The author of this book gets carried away to say the least. He strays far from actual facts and delves into his crazy theories and parallels of Axl and Slash (forget about the other members in the group) and some ancient figures. It got quite tedious at some points and was not interesting at all. Buy another GnR book!

What makes this book interesting is that its not just about the band, their music and off stage exploits, which is what most rock biographies are all about. Rather, this book is about defining the sociological and psychological impact of Rock N' Roll on modern American culture and the role that Guns N' Roses have played in shaping and defining such cultural perceptions. In this book, Sugarman compares the music and exploits of Guns N' Roses to everything from mythology to philosophy to psychology to modern historical events to convey this thesis. The truth is, what I really liked about this book, is that after finishing it, I felt that I not only learned about Guns N' Roses, but more so about the cultural importance of rock n' roll and the impact that it's had in shaping the modern American cultural landscape of the late 20th century.

Therefore, if you're interested in really learning about why G N' R is such an important band and your interest in music extends beyond what you hear on a CD, than I strongly recommend this book.

A word of caution...I have to say that this is not your typical sex, drugs and rock n' roll biography. If you're looking for a book that's just about the drunken exploits of Axl and the band,you'd best look else where. Not that this book does not cover off on these subjects, its just that there is much more to this book than that.

The book is a disaster. I had to suffer with it for 2 semesters. None of the other students in my Calc I and Calc II courses got anything from it either, as far as I can tell. I had to scramble and seek information from other calc books in order to understand what differentiation and integration was all about. The text in no way prepares one for the exercises. There's no connection between the text and the exercises. In the exercises there appear some inane, open-ended questions that seem to be trying to make some unfathomable point. This is not a book anyone can learn from. I would strongly advise any student who must use this book as their course textbook to CHANGE COLLEGES. There are many great calculus books out there, on all levels. For those who prefer a 'calculus reform' approach, I would recommend Calculus Lite, by Frank Morgan. For the more traditional approach, I got a lot out of Anton's classic.

Teaching with this text - which I've been doing for the past two semesters - is an uphill battle, to say the least. It's a text designed for non-majors; I teach business and social science students. Instructors of these sorts of students need to convince their pupils that they DO need to know how to reason mathematically, and that math IS relevant to their life plans - they can't just rely on their calculators to do all their work for them. When the textbook seems to disagree, our job is all the more difficult.

The authors of _Calculus_ don't seem to have made up their minds regarding whether or not it is necessary to introduce the notion of mathematical justification in this book. On the one hand, the examples feature sound arguments for why a curve looks the way it does, or why a critical point is a maximum or minimum - but on the other hand, alongside Newton's Method and the Bisection Method for estimating roots, is a "Using the Zoom Function on Your Calculator" primer on how to estimate the zeroes of functions. Offhand remarks about "and you can use your graphing calculator for this and that" serve to seriously undermine any attempt to explain to first-year students the concept of mathematical argument - which is unfamiliar to many.

The organization of the chapters is also somewhat questionable. Differentiation is broken up into two sections: one dealing with the concept of a derivative (complete with pictures), and the other pertaining to computing them. While the idea of introducing differentiation through a concrete example - measuring instantaneous velocity given a displacement function - is a good one, by the time students actually get to work with derivatives, they're no longer focused on what they actually represent. Curve sketching is introduced vaguely at the end of the second chapter - before the shortcuts to differentiation are mentioned - and then revisited only in chapter 4.

The section on integration is even worse: again, it's introduced in a concrete manner - this time, by asking how displacement can be computed from a velocity function. But for some bizarre reason, the authors don't take this opportunity to explain that the area under a velocity curve - the integral - is that same displacement function whose derivative was the velocity. It's a perfect opportunity to do so, as it's an interesting and surprising (to the beginner) result, and one that's accessible at this point in the course. But instead, the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is relegated to a later section, long after the "integral as an area" idea has been abandoned and students are just working with integrals as antiderivatives. (Even more curiously, there's a section entitled "The Second Fundamental Theorem of Calculus", but none called "The First Fundamental Theorem of Calculus".)

I'd highly recommend James Stewart's _Calculus_ instead of this text for a first-year calc course: the material is far better explained, and there's even a section on the inadequacies of graphing calculators (which are expensive, and which most first year students don't have the mathematical background to use properly).

When I took Multivariable Calculus, we used "Multivariable Calculus" by James Steward in class. I personal like Steward's book very much because it made me understand without the help of my professor. With a supplement of this book, I found I understand Multivariable Calculus in a more comprehensive way. All in all, I like this book a lot.

Besides the picture on the front, this book is horrible! I've learned more by personal derivation and experimenting than through this book. The explanations are overly bloated, and include so many approximations and tables that the theory behind this book's ramblings is lost completely. Instead of focusing on theoretical multivariable calculus while introducing, as a short diversion an approximating method, this book builds around a foundation of approximations, which clouds the actual mathematics in the process.

In my opinion, unless theory is ingrained in students' heads from the start, they will never even attempt to understand it. After all, the book gives the theory second priority, so why should students pay any attention to it?

Moreover, in the introduction, the book promises to have problem sets that a student "cannot just look for a similar example to solve... you will have to think." However, after working with this book's homework problems, I've found them to be the exact opposite of this! There are plenty of similar examples for any given problem, and as a result the teacher's role becomes trivial, while at the same time students don't really understand anything they're doing. Not only this, but the problems are overly MUNDANE, and there is too much practice for a single concept. If a student has taken calculus, he can do derivatives, so he should not need 31 exercises to learn how to do partial derivatives.

Capping all this off, there are no truly challenging problems at all in this book. All of them focus on mechanical methods rather than clever application of known theory. The biggest challenge in this book, in fact, is keeping your hand intact as you take 50 partial derivatives, and then hit a problem that says "repeat for the second partial derivatives."

Meanwhile, your fine motor skills deteriorate quickly as you overwork them drawing or re-drawing a graph or table every other problem.

Bravo, Debbie Hughes, you can use Mathematica's graphing capabilities to their fullest. We're all proud of you. Now can you keep them out of your textbook? No one wants to see a billion tables staring them in the face, and then have to copy and change a billion more for homework. That's not a way to learn. This whole textbook is just a way to pretend you're learning.

Waiting to really learn anything from this book is like waiting for Richard Simmons to get married. Trust me, it's not gonna happen, folks.

kubkhan

"This innovative book is the product of an NSF funded calculus consortium based at Harvard University and was developed as part of the calculus reform movement" Beware of Harvard, i.e. reform Calculus. Instead of teaching people about maxima and minima, you show them how to use a calculator to guess. What a load of junk. Nobody learns what anything means, just how to apply formulas, etc. It is a shame what books and authors like these are doing to college mathematics. This book is particularly bad, a whole bunch of fluff, not a damn ounce of substance.

I have to disagree with my fellow Californians and unfortunately agree with someone from New York. This is an excellent foundation overview without the clutter of Anton's and Stewart's books. I found it to be a conveniently carried paperback and an enjoyable read.

This book contains information that was probably more relevant when it was first written. Most is passe by today's standards. The links referenced in the book for the support site, and that for a shopping cart are both dead.

Gosh! I found this book useful and am amazed at the flames of other readers. I found information here that none of the other (Que, Sams, Wrox, etc.) books had. For example: Mailto, Submit-it. In this it solved some problems for commercial pages I had developed that I could not (repeate could not) find in any other book (or even the news groups). The only reason I graded it down was due to the organization. There I do agree with the other readers. It would seem that this book was rushed out the door to print.

Laura Lemay's book,Creating a Commercial Web Page is good for starters and corporate business' interested in learning the basics and creating new ideas for web pages. As a beginner the set-up presents simple instructions and helpful tips to continue changing web page from time to time.

If you must use this book for class, save yourself a lot of headache and get Emanuel's Outline or flashcards on the subject or Gilbert's Outline. This book is very difficult reading compared to my other other law books. Law professors should really stay away from it.

Like many students in law school I had to read this book for my Torts class. Our professor did an excellent job with a fairly mediocre book by explaining the concepts and cases at length (and thus eliminating the need for me to go and buy supplemental materials). There are sections of the book that you can gloss over (and this is precisely what our professor had us do) unless you really need to know more about tort wars or statutes of limitations etc. This book is something of a necessary evil for learning torts, but as a reference book it doesn't really cut it. If you want a more clear and concise book that you can read or peruse or use as a reference then this is not the book for you. It's strictly a textbook, but one that does the job. It could have been done better and without the typos (surely a computer spellchecker could have been used as this is the 21st century for crying out loud!). I'll be selling my book back this coming semester simply because I don't think there is anything I need from this book that I can't get elsewhere and for the record I actually enjoyed learning about torts. I would thank my excellent professor more than this book though.

I am astounded at the previous reviews of this case book. The typos, though present, do nothing to detract from it's purpose - to deliver brief and interesting cases that explain torts in a sensible and logical order.
This book is a pleasure to read, and it CERTAINLY is not diffcult to understand. It is in fact the clearest and most vibrant law text I've encountered. Students having trouble finding the majority opinion need to read the whole case; those not understanding the order of the tort law presentation need to read the entire book.

Skipped around leaving some odd problems out of book. Only explained a few problems in total detail. This is by far the worst solutions manual on the market. Bring it back for a refund before its to late.

This is, without a doubt, the most incredibly worthless book I have come across in my college experience. I am getting an A in Calculus in spite of, and NOT because of this book. The so-called "Harvard Method" leaves the student with the concepts of calculus, but with none of the tools to actually perform the operations. If you get stuck with this as a required text, I strongly recommend you also purchase a traditional calculus text to actually learn from.

I used this book about three years ago for all my three calculus classes, and most of my classmates liked it. We found this book to be very challenging because it made us think all semester long. We also liked it because our professor explained every single example of the book; most of all, they were very explained by our professor. Now I am looking forward to see the new edition of the book.

I was looking through this in a bookstore to see if it would be a good recommendation for a friend wanting to learn java. Save your money. Lemay turns simple concepts into convoluted blather. There are better books with fewer errors.

1. This book contains too many erors. most examples do not work. 2. It has NO JAVA 1.1 in it. 3.How it got published is a mystery. Anyone wants to learn JAVA needs to look elsewhere. this one SUCKS! To Laura (the author) Do this world a favor,write about things you really know and write less. T.I.A

Wow this is really beginning to piss me off. I see all these different editions of java books by Laura Lemay with tiny little differences. This book is called Java 1.1 Interactive Course but in the middle it mentions that the current version of the jdk is 1.0.2! The only part where it talks about java 1.1 is near the end and thats just a small summary. (Wow its exactly the same as teach yourself java in 21 days with a few new chapters and sessions and chapters instead of days. This is not a very good book for learning java because it contains no exercises. This is like reading a book on math with no exercises! It does try to cover everything about java but it fails to explain it in a clear manner and does not go into detail. Look elsewhere for really learning java but look here if you want some CEUS.