www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Bit disappointed with TDPL build quality

reply strtr <strtr spam.com> writes:
I just got my (44E) copy of the TDPL and I love the stuff I've read so far.

But, the book as an object kind of disappoints me..
I know it isn't a hard-cover, but still:

I don't own any book with this kind of translucent pages. It makes all the
pages look smudgy and you can actually read the bibliography through page 431.
Also, maybe I don't own any books which use the same cutting process, but it
looks really sloppy cut.

Maybe it's just my book, but just thought I should mention this.
Jul 01 2010
next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisprog gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, July 01, 2010 14:22:30 strtr wrote:
 I just got my (44E) copy of the TDPL and I love the stuff I've read so far.
 
 But, the book as an object kind of disappoints me..
 I know it isn't a hard-cover, but still:
 
 I don't own any book with this kind of translucent pages. It makes all the
 pages look smudgy and you can actually read the bibliography through page
 431. Also, maybe I don't own any books which use the same cutting process,
 but it looks really sloppy cut.
 
 Maybe it's just my book, but just thought I should mention this.

In any case, the only problem that I've had with the quality of the book's material is that I've been carrying it around so much that it's starting to get a bit worn on the edges. And given that it's paperback, that's likely pretty much a given unless you go out of your way to make sure that it's treated really carefully, or you just leave it on the shelf and don't read it. The paper is a bit translucent, but it doesn't really affect the readability IMO, and the paper does seem to be of good quality. I'm sure that you could find other books with this sort of paper - especially if you look at books from the same publisher. Overall, I really like the quality of the book. About the only thing that I could have asked for would be a hardcover, but that's not exactly the norm for programming books. - Jonathan M Davis P.S. spam.com? I would have thought that an address like that would be taboo. What's the idea, that there's no way a spammer would label their e-mail adress as spam?
Jul 01 2010
parent strtr <strtr sp.am> writes:
== Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisprog gmail.com)'s article
 On Thursday, July 01, 2010 14:22:30 strtr wrote:
 I just got my (44E) copy of the TDPL and I love the stuff I've read so far.

 But, the book as an object kind of disappoints me..
 I know it isn't a hard-cover, but still:

 I don't own any book with this kind of translucent pages. It makes all the
 pages look smudgy and you can actually read the bibliography through page
 431. Also, maybe I don't own any books which use the same cutting process,
 but it looks really sloppy cut.

 Maybe it's just my book, but just thought I should mention this.

material is that I've been carrying it around so much that it's starting to get a bit worn on the edges. And given that it's paperback, that's likely pretty much a given unless you go out of your way to make sure that it's treated really carefully, or you just leave it on the shelf and don't read it.

(This does lower the real life spamming value ;)
 The paper is a bit translucent, but it doesn't really affect the readability
IMO,
 and the paper does seem to be of good quality. I'm sure that you could find
other
 books with this sort of paper - especially if you look at books from the same
 publisher. Overall, I really like the quality of the book. About the only thing
 that I could have asked for would be a hardcover, but that's not exactly the
 norm for programming books.

I'm reading has just that much higher quality paper(also thinner btw). And the cut I can't seem to stop whining about the cut :D
 - Jonathan M Davis
 P.S.  spam.com? I would have thought that an address like that would be taboo.
 What's the idea, that there's no way a spammer would label their e-mail adress
 as spam?

Jul 02 2010
prev sibling parent reply BCS <none anon.com> writes:
Hello Strtr,

 I just got my (44E) copy of the TDPL and I love the stuff I've read so
 far.
 
 But, the book as an object kind of disappoints me.. I know it isn't a
 hard-cover, but still:
 
 I don't own any book with this kind of translucent pages. It makes all
 the pages look smudgy and you can actually read the bibliography
 through page 431. Also, maybe I don't own any books which use the same
 cutting process, but it looks really sloppy cut.
 
 Maybe it's just my book, but just thought I should mention this.
 

Ditto on 431 but only where the isn't text covering it up. Also keep in mind that more opaque paper would be thicker and the book is not exactly thin to begin with. -- ... <IXOYE><
Jul 01 2010
parent strtr <strtr sp.am> writes:
== Quote from BCS (none anon.com)'s article
 Hello Strtr,
 I just got my (44E) copy of the TDPL and I love the stuff I've read so
 far.

 But, the book as an object kind of disappoints me.. I know it isn't a
 hard-cover, but still:

 I don't own any book with this kind of translucent pages. It makes all
 the pages look smudgy and you can actually read the bibliography
 through page 431. Also, maybe I don't own any books which use the same
 cutting process, but it looks really sloppy cut.

 Maybe it's just my book, but just thought I should mention this.

that more opaque paper would be thicker and the book is not exactly thin to begin with.

Well, that's the thing, the paper in my MIT press book is quite a bit thinner, but far less translucent. But I also found a Chinese press book which was more translucent (although it was also 3/4 the thickness) Maybe it was mostly the cut which made it look cheap.
Jul 02 2010