My 2nd edition copy is also well-worn, so I was eager to get my hands on the next edition.

I agree with Doug Bell's comments on the 3rd edition. I find it more complete and accurate but harder to navigate.

In addition, I have a particular complaint about the figures. The use of bitmapped images in the 3rd edition made them far less readable than they were in the 2nd. To be frank, it looks amateurish.

For examples, compare:

Transformation process - pg 55 (2nd ed.) with pg 47 (3rd ed.)
Figure 2.4 - pg 57 (2nd ed.) with pg 49 (3rd ed.)
Figure 2.6 - pg 72 (2nd ed.) with pg 56 (3rd ed.)

There are many, many other instances. As a documentation manager, I am sensitive to the first impression my documents create, and these blurry bitmaps do little to build my confidence in the content of the work. It is a good thing this is not my first exposure to WROX. I think you have done a disservice to Michael's fine work. Where was the editorial oversight?