ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues NEC Handbooks - opinions

Ryan... I am not familiar with the McG book in particular, but...

I have seen far too many "expert" books with major flaws, that seem to have been slicked together by marketing, with no review or input from their intended market. In some cases, it is almost as if they want all of us to "edit" their first edition for them, for free!

A mattter of money? Seems like, considering the ststure of the competition, you have no xhoice but to outshine them!

Ryan- I think you said what needed to be said and I venture to say if you wrote a book or anyone else you'd have to stand the critque of all of us and you'd be able to do it. Never let it be said that Mr. Jackson sugar coated anything.

George, thanks for the support. I edit for Mike Holt, and I expect to hear about it when someone finds a mistake there.

OK - Guys thanks for the input. I must admit I was already leaning toward the nfpa. I think I may have been pushed all the way now .

I love'em both.

Not buying them is no saving.

I love the McGraw-Hill (2005) illustrations.

Naturally, I have both.

My 'trade library' is about the last place I try and economize.

I was actually thanking you guys. I have been tactfully trying to have some changes positioned for the book, and I used this thread to maybe help push it along. So if you have some more constructive critisism, have at it... more to fuel the fire.

My stance is the book has to come into the 21st century. It was THE book too many years ago. Try dealing with a mega publisher such as McGraw Hill though.

If this thread is being used for the publisher, then erase my compliment about the McPartlands, as I don't want them to get a big head

Lucky -

...just as a FYI....if you go to eBay auctions, you can find the McGraw-Hill version(s) for pennies on the dollar.

That said, like Ryan, I'd never buy one for myself.

"In some cases, it is almost as if they want all of us to "edit" their first edition for them, for free!"

In many cases it isn't a matter of editing. To edit something it should be proof read first. I don't think they are going that far in a lot of instances.

Just a moment for a "catty" comment....

IF I wrote something, then had to write another boox explaining what I meant.... well, wouldn't that suggest I was a poor writer?