Most Helpful Customer Reviews
81 of 83 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
I agree with most of you..., July 26, 2005
This review is from: Spring: A Developer's Notebook (Paperback)
I'm the author of this book, and I'm writing myself a one star review because you're all right, and you deserve to know what I'm doing about it. We pushed out a book before it was ready, and let way too many errors go undiscovered. My co-author, Justin Gehtland's blog chronicles the experience well. Let me tell you what we're doing so it doesn't happen again.
* We've just worked on a reprinting of this book with the great folks at O'Reilly.
* We've invested more time in the reprinting than we invested in pushing the book out to production the first time.
* O'Reilly has paid for independent reviewers to make sure that we have the code and content rock solid.
* O'Reilly has eaten the remaining books in the original printing, and will use only the reprint.
* I've refrained from promoting the book in public, until the reprinting was under way. I made no announcement in the usual places, even my blog.
My appologies to all readers, and O'Reilly customers. I let you down. There's no other way to put it. This book's quality sucked. We were overconfident after the Jolt award, and pushed it out before it was ready. If you do happen to order it, make sure that you get the reprint.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
19 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Updated Edition?, December 21, 2005
This review is from: Spring: A Developer's Notebook (Paperback)
After purchasing the disaster that was the original edition, I purchased the updated version based on two things: (1) O'Reilly's usual quality products and (2) the review on this site by the author Bruce Tate discussing the changes made to the updated edition.
Well, gee... this time they made it all the way to Example 1-10 before there was an error. Granted, it's a small, easy one ("RentABikeApp-context.xml" instead of "RentABike-context.xml"), but it's still an unforgivable error given the train-wreck of the first printing.
By Example 1-12 (the ant build.xml) there are calls to directories which are not defined in the example, and other code which (depending upon how your local environment is set up) will simply not work at all. This particular situation could have been fixed by (a) providing explicit instructions on Spring framework setup so that the examples will automagically work for all those using the book and (b) some simple proofreading of the code.
Nothing I have mentioned constitutes insurmountable problems for someone familiar with J2EE development and ant, but it is simply rude and terribly infuriating that the simplest examples in the "updated" version require debugging of the code printed in the book.
What led to the approval of this new version which is still fraught with issues? Was it laziness? Ineptitude? At this point I don't care. If they can't even get me through chapter one without the requirement that I fix their code, I give up. I wish I could give this zero stars, particularly after they KNEW of the problems with the initial printing.
Perhaps they can get it right by version 5 or 7... until then, find another Spring book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Further comments on the reprint, August 19, 2005
This review is from: Spring: A Developer's Notebook (Paperback)
I ordered this book directly from the publisher back in early June and discovered to my surprise that it was not in stock. Yet I had seen it in a number of brick and mortar stores in my area, so I contacted them and was told that bookstores were being told to pull the book from the shelves because the book had so many problems it was being reprinted.
However, a few weeks later I was still seeing the book on bookshelves at stores and when I asked about that the store folks indicated they had not received a recall notice. Who to believe?
I finally received my copy today in the mail. The only thing that indicates this is a different copy than the original printing is an "Updated" label in the top right hand corner of the cover page. Otherwise the ISBN number is the same, and it still says "April 2005, First Edition" in the printing history section. There is no indicator in the Preface section that the book was subject to a reprinting, which I think would have been appropriate, as well as an update in the printing history - after all, isn't that the point of a printing history section?
So look for "Updated" on the cover, and only buy that version!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|