Re: Docs
Re: Docs
- Subject: Re: Docs
- From: Jonathan Hendry <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:35:07 -0500
On Thursday, August 23, 2001, at 11:10 , Phillip Mills wrote:
On 8/23/01 11:52 AM, "Chuck Toporek" <email@hidden> wrote:
Phillip Mills wrote:
Even finding a person to type in the examples and verify that
they compile
would be a GIANT step in the right direction. I buy a lot of
O'Reilly
books, both for work and home. Obviouly, I usually like them or
I'd have
stopped years ago...but I feel like a sucker for having spent
money on this
one. It gives me the feeling that someone saw an opportunity to
"Make Money
Fast" and rushed it out the door with the least attention to
quality and
content possible.
I don't think we (or Apple) were trying to "Make Money Fast" by
publishing that book.
OK, I'll try to think of other reasons for the number of errors,
See their errata page. It's a book, not a webpage, they can't
change it dynamically.
lack of consistency, and superficial treatment.
Well, it _was_ called "Learning Cocoa", not "Mastering The AppKit
View System".
The preface states "For those who want to learn how to create Cocoa
applications, this book provides such a _starting point_."(Emphasis
mine)
It's a starting point. Not the ultimate reference to Cocoa that answers
all questions and explains everything.
"This book eases your way into the experience of Cocoa programming. It
encourages you to play, explore, and 'kick the tires'. When you finish
this book, you will be much better prepared to take on serious
application
development with Cocoa."
A book can't be everything to every person. It seems to me that the book
pretty well accomplishes what they set out to do. No, it doesn't
go into great depth about anything. It's only 300-some pages long,
and has to cover a _lot_ of topics, in a manner fit for beginners.
My OReilly book on Swing (just Swing) is twice as long. Why would
an in-depth look at _all_ of Cocoa be just 300 pages?
That's a nice, "can't we all just get along," thing to say and,
although I
seriouly applaud any efforts in that direction for the future, I
think you
should consider issuing a recall on the original. :-/
I think you wanted a different book. That doesn't mean this book
is broken.
Anyway, this is pretty much offtopic.
| References: | |
| | >Re: Docs (From: Phillip Mills <email@hidden>) |