I can't give five starts to a book like this, and it may contain many errors
933860
I can't give five starts to a book like this, and it may contain many errors, but it is worth pointing to the reference to J.G.Bennett without endorsing the whole book.
I think Bennett (connected to sufis, and the book is an Octagon print, from Idries Shah zone) almost got it right. Readers should check out my World History and the Eonic Effect:
We must distinguish three different things, and they are all in Bennett, but not in the right analysis:
1. demiurgic powers
2. a hidden directorate
3. the cascade of cosmic laws as in Bennett with _!_biospheres in that sequence of levels.
 4. Ordinary men, buddhas, and perhaps men with 'permanent I', whatever that is.

Many students get evolution and demiurgic powers confused. Demiurgic powers probably don't have the energy resources to terraform planets or do operations on a global scale: this springs from biosphere (GAIA!). Demiurgic powers can move inside this context like men in a factory but the larger system is different. This is why noone can figure out the evolution of religion, civilization and man, and the hopeless confusions of 'design arguments'. The Axial Age shows the emergence of religion in a larger context of civilization: this is biospheric with demiurgic co-participation. Bur the modern new age throws a curve ball. This biospheric level seems cyclic as Bennett noted and this suggests it is hypermechanical, while demiurgic beings have 'will' of some kind (although in Bennett biospheres have 'will' in a different sense, 24 laws?). And this leaves the founders like buddha in an ambiguous context. The sequence of age periods is fixed: religions can arise in their transitions like Hinayana or Israelitism or they can arise in the middle periods like Mahayana, Christianity, Islam. It is important to study the diffierence because two sets of operations are different.
Religions are probably delegated to the hidden directorate, or figures like Gautama, who can initiate their starting points, while their actual construction sequence ends in the hands of men. This is why the Old Testament seems so smart and primitive at the same time. It clearly distinguish 'god' and 'elohim' btw...
These three distinctions (or four) go a long way to explaining the confusion over religion, civilization, secularism, etc... We have bioshpere, demiurgic powers, a hidden directorate, and buddhas who clearly did not see anything beyond their enlightenment, a very tricky situation. And then ordinary men. The Israelites were very smart and saw  a higher power or the bioshpere where the buddha saw only a 'turning of the wheel', with a visit from the 'god realm' (???). The gestation of Christianity, Islam, Mahayana (outside of the Axial Age) are thus at best influenced by the hidden directorate, and then human agents, with the Jesus figure in between. Scott is close on many points but this analysis is filled with traps...His take on Islam and sufis is useful at a time when Islamophobes are rampant. The question of the hidden directorate is vexed. Just who are these beings and how do they relate to incarnation? The buddhas move beyond incarnation. There is a another category?? (the boddhissatwa perhaps being an artificial imitation).  The emergence of Christianity was a complete mess, yet succeeded in spite of itself. This model may help. Being a part of the 'hidden directorate' raises as many questions as it answers. They must support themselves over many lives on the surface of a planet, not an easy thing to do. We have not facts  here, so we should be wary.
Note that, and Bennett realized this, modernity is a new age. This confounds all traditionalists. But it is important to see that the progression of epochs is beyond the 'sacred/secular' distinction. A closer look shows the Reformation and buddhism reborn in spite of itself, just as Jainism was reborn in the Axial Age, but then giving way to buddhism.
4323066
A lot of errors and opportunities for a good edit lost. It would be one thing if this were a history text book, but you can't really get commands and literal information wrong like this and get away with it.
2321811
I would agree with the earliest reviewer that this book is laden with errors.  Perhaps the editor needs to take a refresher course in editing a book!!  And the author's pompous attitude does get a bit irritating.
Putting the above aside, the examples cited are quite fascinating. They really demonstrate the importance of square control.  The problem is that the author does a very bad job of explaining his ideas and presenting the material.  The definition of key squares is rather vague, yet this is the most important idea of the book.  The author should have attempted to convey how to identify key squares in an endgame position. He should have laid out the principles involved. This would have enhanced the value of the book considerably. Instead, he simply tells you which squares are the key squares. It was not always obvious to me why he chose the squares he did, but after analyzing the positions certain patterns emerged which the author failed to point out. Another concept that lacked sufficient explanation is how to find correspondences once the key squares are identified.
Unfortunately chess books that teach individuals how to think and how to evaluate a position are in the minority ("Best Lessons of a Chess Coach" is one of these exceptional books, and I highly recommend it). "The Final Countdown" falls short in this regard, but it could be rewritten with the examples used and be a five star book. Jeremy Silman recommends this book (maybe he should rewrite it!!), and he is perhaps the best chess teacher of his peers.
4366955
The book is exactly what you might expect, a good beginners' guide to using databases with C#. Well, it could be. There are just TOO many errors. I don't mean typos either. On a couple of occasions, the code examples were incomplete. In others, the code was inconsistent with the directions in the text. You really find yourself thinking a lot about the code samples in order to get the examples to work. I guess that can be a good thing sometimes because you may understand the code more, but if you are one to get discouraged easily when things don't go as planned, then by all means, steer clear of this one! Three stars is probably generous due to the fundamental flaws of this book.
3783643
While I liked the general format and content of this book, there were numerous errors in the book that were confusing and misleading, including typos in the practice exercises that invalidated questions, and several errors in the electronic test.
Having experience with Java, I recognized most of these problems when they were presented, but for someone new to the language, many of these will be baffling.
It is inexcusable that a book in its third edition would have so many key errors.  Reviewers who liked this book either already know the material, or don't know what they missed!  Perhaps the Fourth Edition will correct these? Ouch.
530122
There are so many inaccuracies in this book, I do not know where to begin.
191369
I don't normally criticize, especially as the author clearly went far in some places to actually contact some of the event creators, but holy crap the errors. How a published book gets all the way through editing, especially in what appears to be a second edition, with so many typos, grammatical and spelling errors I have no idea. I haven't even finished the book and were I an English teacher I'd give a C- just on the errors alone. Then there's the factual errors such as incorrect, sometimes internally inconsistent house locations and names of characters. Then there's glaring omissions of major parts of certain years. Some parts Wikipedia has more information on. I knew in advance I would likely already know 99% of what the book could possibly tell me, but I purchased it for one promise: It claimed to give walkthroughs of every house and scarezine in HHN history. I already know, from memory, the names and locations of every house, but in many cases do not have a clear understanding of the details inside many earlier houses. What did I get? "This house had a room with a vampire doing a thing." Paraphrasing of course, but that's about the level of detail it gave for many of the houses. I'm tempted to take a red pen and edit this sucker myself and send it back to the author, or at least the editor, who was apparently asleep, if he bothered to read the book at all.
701730
There were at least 100 typos, misspellings, punctuation and grammatical errors.  It wasn't an easily read book for me anyhow, but these mistakes on nearly every page made it grueling.  I've ordered the same book from a different publisher, as I really want to read it again without all the printing errors.
4358669
There are so many errors in this book it makes me wonder if anyone reread it before it went to press.
4685162
There are numerous errors. The author should review each problem statement and solution, make revisions where needed, and send a FREE copy of the revised edition to the people who bought the first edition.
1843524
A NOTE TO ALL READERS

As the author of this book, I feel a strong sense of responsibility for everything in it. Naturally, typos and other errors are an inevitable occurrence despite all attempts to achieve perfection. Writers have to overlook the occasional misspelled word or transposed letters and dismiss them as trivial. However, I discovered a number of errors in this book which should be brought to the attention of the reader and corrected. Obviously it is too late to fix any errors in this volume and all of the information in it is there to stay forever, whether it is accurate or not. So, in an effort to affect some degree of damage control, I have included this list of errata to be kept with this book in an attempt to set the record straight for all present and future readers.

* The book was incorrectly titled: "U.S. Naval Aviation Flying Clothing and Gear" by Schiffer. This was a temporary file name given to the text by someone at Schiffer. I reminded my editor to correct the title at all three stages of the editing process but they either forgot or refused to fix the problem. The title should be: "U.S. Naval Aviation Clothing and Equipment". The incorrect title is particularly unfortunate since "aviation" and "flying" are somewhat redundant.

* The U.S. Navy Mark I life vest is incorrectly referred to as "Mark II" throughout the book. This error was due to the "fuzzy logic" used by a computerized grammar correcting program. It appears that references to "Mark I" as in the "Mark I life vest" and "Mark I Willson goggles" was interpreted as a conflict with similar references using roman numerals as in "Mark II Willson goggles" and "World War II". Evidently the grammar correcting program continuously prompted the user to "correct" one or the other and at some point "Mark I" was changed to "Mark II" for all Mark I life vest references in the text.

* The back figure in the facing page photo has the top of his head cut off. The photo was cropped too short by the layout people at Schiffer. There is no excuse for this and it amounts to nothing less than sloppy editing.

* In the last paragraph of the introduction, the word "imposable" should be "impossible".

* Left and right are incorrectly transposed in the caption for the photo at the bottom right on page 126.

* The word "them" should be "the" in the caption at the bottom of page 219.

* On pages 248 and 250, Admiral John S. McCain is incorrectly described as Admiral Marc Mitscher. Both photos were incorrectly captioned at the National Archives. This error is somewhat understandable since both men were admirals, both were aviators, both were very close in age and both bore a resemblance to each other.

I sincerely offer my most humble apologies to all readers for these errors and I hope to include this list with all future sales of this volume. I have been graciously reassured by everyone who currently owns a copy that the aforementioned errors do not diminish the value or scope of work of the book. I encourage all owners of this book to copy and paste these corrections to a printable format and keep them with their copy for future reference.

Jeff Warner
1747876
I love the title and the idea of the book--a fun, accessible introduction to geography. And, the book accomplishes what it sets out to do, to a large extent. However, as I read it I kept being jarred by errors; not just typos or minor errors, but really big, sloppy mistakes. Here are a few of them (from the 1992 paperback):

 Page 175: Since it takes the moon a little more than a day to orbit the Earth . . .

 Wrong, and in a way that suggests the author really doesn't understand the Earth-Moon system.

 Page 212: . . . the white marble lighthouse stood 440 feet (1234 meters) high . . .

Let's see, are meters longer than feet, or shorter than feet? Do we multiply or divide?

 Page 275:  . . . meteorites strike at tremendous speeds--as much as 90,000 miles per second.

 Hmmm. That's about half the speed of light. I don't think so.

 Page 289: The spiraling winds may reach from 9 to 24 miles (15 to 20 km) up into the atmosphere.

 At least try to keep the numbers consistent.

 Page 312: Pluto may actually belong to another solar system . . .

Then what is it doing orbiting the sun?

Etc., Etc., Etc.

It's a very good idea, but one that deserved a lot more care.

Robert Adler, author of Science Firsts: From the Creation of Science to the Science of Creation; and Medical Firsts: From Hippocrates to the Human Genome.
2190737
Overall this book is a good resource as it teaches the reader many skills needed to take the test but the example problems have multiple errors and I could not find an errata for the book. In particular, the hardest math questions and hardest verbal questions have answers that do not match the questions. Anyone studying for the GMAT needs to understand that the errors in the book could lead to problems on the actual test. I think this could have been an excellent book if the writers/editors had taken the time to correct all the errors or at least provided a place where we could find the corrections online.
3821423
There are a lot of errors that make it rough at some parts but this book is definitely worth reading.
997405
This book has the potential to be really great if some of the problems are fixed in subsequent edition. The problem is that the book has several errors that will be very confusing for beginners. One of these errors early on is in the SQL statements to create tables; some of information is obviously accidentally repeated and it causes an error when you run the query.  Now if you've never written SQL before how are you going to identify what the error is? Another example of a glaring error is one of the test questions. Don't get me wrong book is great because it has questions that test your knowledge of what you have just learned, however in one chapter on nested queries the answer required is something the author did not teach! The answer required a nested query in the SELECT statement however only nested queries in the WHERE and FROM clauses were taught which is a big omission in and of itself. Other than these problems it is a great book, but I wanted to share my experience so that any other new programmers can judge for themselves whether it is worth the hassle. When I read this book I had previous SQL experience but just wanted to make sure there wasn't anything I was missing anything, but a true newb might struggle here. Hopefully Martin Holzke will have these errors fixed.
3606802
This book does have some deficiencies. First, this book suffered from a number of mistakes and misconceptions (IPSEC policies comes to mind). Second, the book's organization is often haphazard and disjointed.  Third, I didn't feel that topic exposition was as well thought out as the 70-210 Pro or 70-215 Server Readiness Review books (they are definitely better).
Even with its obvious problems, I still recommend the book.  Other books rarely drill down the level of detail that the readiness review books do.  This is the first of the series that I have not been completely satisfied with.
1553309
When I started using this book, I was really impressed with the interactive format, and I do still enjoy it.  Then I began noticing lots of editorial errors and inconsistancies.  Example: in an exercise, they ask you to check the closed syllables in win dow, but the answer area has the word "wing" for the answer to "window".  In that same section, where all two syllable words have been split into their two syllable sections (as I did with "window" above), they have "begin" as a one syllable word, but give "gin" as one of the answers as it should be as a two syllable word.  Also, in the vowel section, vowel sounds aren't matching up.  For example: they say that the short a sound at the beginning of apple is the same short a sound in Dan.  Due to the placement of the letter a in each word, the a sound is different, so Dan is not a good example of the key symbol short a as in apple as the authors would want you to believe.  This may be a dialectical issue.

It feels as if the book was quickly put together without a 2nd or 3rd editing before publishing; that care was not taken in making sure everything was right and ready.  This is frustrating.  I can understand a typo every once in awhile, but mistakes abound.  If you can look past them, this book is pretty good.