The imperfect world of SCWCD

I keep reading all these angry postings about errors in the Levi/Heller book, errors in the Javadoc, errors in the specification, and I think....
What an angry bunch the Ranchers can be!
It's an imperfect world, so please calm down. It is disturbing to find supposedly professional documents that contain glaring errors, but at the end of the day we all know: if we work hard, we'll pass this exam and any other they care to throw at us!
Or am I the only one who sees it that way?
Tony.

It is good that "some people" are taking interest in "stress testing" both the books

This will help determine which is the best and will save us some money

In fact, I propose (seriously) to have two threads titled Manning Errata and Sybex Errata (or something to that effect), where people can vent their anger by exposing the shortcomings of their investment. This will really be a boon to people who are following either of the books.
What do you all say?
I personally find the Manning book quite interesting. And I have been dissuaded enough not to buy the Sybex book

Hi,
I have been reading the Sybex book. The only problem is that it is not as good as the SCJP2 book, but otherwise it is okay. It covers a little bit more than the exam objectives. But clearly marks which exam objectives are covered in which chapter. I would suggest people to buy both Sybex and Manning.

Tony: No!!! I definitely do not see it that way! I can not disagree with you more!
I see mistakes in items I have purchased (either books, study guides, whatever) and mistakes in materials from Sun(since I paid for the exam I indirectly paid money)as two things ==>
1. A complete and total waste of my very valuable personal time.
2. A complete and total waste of my very valuable money.
Of course, when my time & money is wasted, it pisses me off. In a real big way.
I am not a human guinea pig for other people to use to make money for themselves (selling books, materials, whatever.)
Why should I have to suffer, because other people were too cheap & greedy to hire editors and technical staff to proof their materials PRIOR to sale?
Kevin Thompson
[ August 05, 2002: Message edited by: Kevin Thompson ]

After reading all the errors posted, I would say it is a shame that the publisher rush out this book to collect money.
I would return it right away and file a complain to the publisher!!

I agree with Kevin. Why should I pay my hard earned money and do the job of a proof reader? And who will be responsible for the waste of my efforts and exam fees if I fail in the exam? Will the publisher pay me that fees?
It is because our lax attitude that the publisher has the audacity to sell crap to us. I mean, just look at the errors that people have posted. What are we? stupid???

I can only talk about the Sybex book by Natalie Levi. I worked through all the official errata the other day, and I didn't find anything to get excited about. I'd already spotted most of them anyway, and there was nothing that changed my understanding of the topic.
So, yes, they've been a bit negligent on the proof reading, but I'm not going to let that distract me from the job in hand.
Tony.

Originally posted by tony franz:
I worked through all the official errata the other day, and I didn't find anything to get excited about.

May be because you did not consider the unofficial errata

So, yes, they've been a bit negligent ...

A bit? :roll:
In any case, I don't understand why are you defending the book? If there are errers, there are errors. And if you, as a consumer, don't complain, who will? In fact, if you don't complain, they'll do the same thing with their next book. Will they not?