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?

The issue with some of the figures was an embarrassing mistake by an outside vendor doing layout whom we no longer work with. As the editor, I was as frustrated by this as you are when I saw my first print copy of the 3rd edition which was when this mistake was first visible. Ultimately, we take responsibility as it showed a gap in our processes to catch this kind of vendor mistake, a mistake that shouldn't happen the way we work now.
We're working on correcting this, the navigation, and many other improvements for a great new 4th edition that's in the works.

Jim Minatel
Senior Acquisitions Editor
Wiley Technology Publishing
WROX Press
Blog: http://wroxblog.typepad.com/
Jim's Book of the week: No book this week - Donate to the Red Cross!