Username or EmailPassword
I have Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment, 1st Edition and read it cover to cover. Same with TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume 1. I'm still working on Unix Network Programming, 2nd Edition, Volume 1. All are first-class books. With the new editions of APUE and UNPv1, I'm torn between getting the new editions or staying with what I have. I think I'll stick with pure W. Richard Stevens and spend my money on TCPv2.
Do the differences between the 1st and 2nd editions an "upgrade" purchase?
sorry, that was meant to be:
"Do the differences between the 1st and 2nd editions MERIT an upgrade purchase?"
That always happens to me
Why is communication with a network printer a real world project anymore?
How about writing a basic p2p client?
How much money does osnews gets by buying the book via that link?
The actual review content of this story is pretty thin.
How do you think the business models on these sites work?
The sky is blue, as well.
Is not! It's black!
First of all, the book deserves its reputation as one of the best tech books in the trade.
And to answer your question about the link, it's about 1% per copy *sold*, I think. And it's not myself who gets that (very little) money btw, none of the osnews editors are getting paid. So, I hardly find this to be an 'ad' on my part. I have nothing to gain other than making a worthy book more known to the tech community. And I don't happen to be married to Mr Stevens either.
Getting married to him would be difficult as he is sadly no longer with us.
A great coder, and a great writer. I own a copy of the book and it is definitely worth the cover price.
Well, Mr. Stevens is dead. His coauthor took over duties for this revision, from what I've heard, and did quite a good job. But I have the first edition and Rochkind's revised book and have other uses for $70 at the moment.
>Well, Mr. Stevens is dead.
Sad, didn't know that. He was indeed a great writer.
He sure was. Sometimes I admired Stevens' ability to explain the UNIX system call interface as much as the architecture he was explaining.
I'm embarassed for you, Eugenia, that review is so short and such a thinly-veiled shill for getting Amazon.com commissions.
Not only that, were you really not aware that W. Richard Stevens has been gone for some years now, and wouldn't a proper review have addressed how such a book would have been published after Mr. Stevens has passed?
His death is briefly mentioned in the preface only, not on the author's bios, which is I would have expected it. This is why I didn't notice it when I first started reading the book a few months ago (I was sent the book in June). As for the 'thin review', I said up-front that this is a quick look at a classic book. You are very welcome to send us over your full review for publication, or do it on the comment's section instead. I am a volunteer here, as everyone else is.
Eugenia, babe, don't worry about these noisy little geeks, looking for conspiracy theories where non-exist - thats of course depends on whether they're a registered Republican, in which case they'll state that there are known unknowns.
As for the book review; one really can't into detail unless one wishes to reguggitate the whole damn book again; for me, it looks damn interesting, and I might purchase a copy when I can next time. I don't programme much myself, but by the review you gave, the books sounds like it covers alot more than just programming.
Thanks for the quick note that you have recieved a free copy of the new APITUE revision. Maybe you should browse around the net a bit for some clarification of what a review generally is. If we don't like it we should submit our own review? Well, if I send you my address will you forward that book along? Seriously Eugenia, you can get angry if you want.. but if I were a publisher I would not be motivated to send you books. If I did not know how good the APITUE really was, I would not be going out to buy the book as well. Why not just link to the amazon reviews with your code and tell us to read them... save you the 15mins you put into this.