If I want to hear how good Director is, I'd go to the Macromedia web site. This book does not go into the specific. It tells you WHAT you can do with Director not actaully HOW to do it. The money I spent on this book does not worth the education I received from it. Oh well, Director 7 is coming out by the time you read this, lt's hope these guys would do a better job at actaully writing a reference book instead of a brouchure.

This book was the required text for my multimedia authoring class because no other Director 6 books were available at the time. It was so poorly laid out that after a few weeks my instructor gave up on teaching with the book. Now that I use Director at work, I've realized that it doesn't even cut it as a reference.

Inside Director tries to teach general multimedia rather than the fundamentals of Director. The book attempts to teach you how to create sound and digital movies in other programs(Which has nothing to do with learning Director), yet it severely lacks in explaining how to handle sound and movies in Director. The book also teaches you more about how to write HTML(Which also has nothing to do with learning Director), then how to create streaming shockwave movies with net Lingo.

Save your money and buy a different book.

Personally I would suggest every begginer or intermediate Director user to read this book. I think it explains what outher books didn`t!!

read its not about the bike it may have been "ghost written" but it has the proper prespective and an editor that passed high school english.

A book on the most dominant american cyclist of his generation by the only mainstream american sports journalist that actually understands the sport. the problem is that this book is nothing more than a compilation of old articles, and obviously done in a rush as well. typos litter the book, the images are far from impressive (the majority are from the '99 tour, and have as much quality as a fans pics taken with a disposable camera). altogether a waste of my money. if you want to learn about armstrong, then buy 'it's not about the bike', and don't waste your time or money on this.

Of the various books about Lance Armstrong, this is easily the most readable and the most atractively presented. It tells the story of Armstrong's early career as well as his painful recovery and amazing comeback and victory in the 1999 Tour de France. Author Samuel Abt and photographer James Startt have put together a personally involved work that makes the reader feel intimately familiar with Armstrong.

HWA was a high school dropout who has been accused of stealing the intellectual property of others and calling it his own (The U.S. and British Commonwealth in Prophecy is one such example). His writing included many FALSE PROPHECIES such as: Britain will be conquered by Nazi (PT Dec 40) Turkey will turn traitor to Britain. Hitler will be falsely resurrected by the Pope (May 65). The only reason his teachings were not discarded years before is because he had iron-fisted control over his organization. Soon after his death his writings were discarded, including his Mystery of the Ages, which he touted as his greatest work. His writings are useful in teaching students how Scripture can be mishandled to support any theory.

Most of the writings of Mr. Armstrong in this book are helpful and are doctrinally sound. It is good to see his articles compiled all in one book. However, I found Nickels' editorial to be biased. I find much of his criticism of Mr. Armstrong to be given without ample proof. I would say that if this book is purchased it is best to concentrate on Mr. Armstrong's writings and take Mr. Nickel's comments with a grain of salt.

I was so amazed to find this book! So much disrespect has been shown Mr Armstrong! He was definitely called 'out of the world'
for a purpose that was so amazing it could only have been by God !
Those whom God calls,He also equips. Mr Armstrong was faithful to the Great God to the very end, reading of his beginnings is such a boost to every thing he taught.
Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God! In every generation there has to be someone to guide,with his hand in the Hand of God, led by the Holy Spirit, Mr Armstrong did his work well.
Preservation of all Mr Armstrong's works is important to all who live with an expectancy of the return of Christ !!

If this book is for people who want to know Armstrong's doctrines, they could just as easily read his final work, "Mystery of the Ages".
(That was as good a summary of what he taught as any.)
If it's not for people new to Armstrong, then who is it for?
The author's website may provide a clue: among those who have been recipients of this book are the leaders and/or big names of the major groups that split off from Armstrong.
So, could it be that Dr. Boston hopes to target the thousands of ex-members of Armstrong's church?
(P.S. You can probably find a copy of "Mystery" at your local library or used book store.)

This book provides an accurate summary of Herbert W. Armstrong's teachings with out commentary or editorial bias. The book is divided into two sections. Part I is about the purpose of mankind and the plan God has for bringing the majority of mankind into the Kingdom of God. Part I also covers Mr. Armstrong's teaching about the soul, heaven and hell, and life after death. Part II is about the United States and Britain in Prophecy. I recommend this book to either students of the Bible or those seeking an accurate summation of Mr. Armstrong's teaching.

This recipe book was written by three vegetarians, who like many vegetarians need to supplement their diet with large amounts of cheese to get their proteins. These are not bird recipes - but people recipes, that use lots of oil, butter, cream and cheese. One recipe that started off well: "Pasta Salad" p.44, ends up with 16 oz of Italian dressing.

Things like "Tortellini in cream sauce" or "Rotelle and cheezy vegetables" or "Garlic-buttered vermicelli" should not be part of your bird`s diet or even yours if you are health concious.

What first caught my eye was a statement on the back of the book, "If your bird is a member of the parrot family, did you know that your bird has a palate nearly as sophisticated as that of a human?" Those of us who own birds and already know this now have a place to come to.

There are a couple of sections at the beginning of the book that are just overall information, "A Well-Balanced Diet for Your Bird," "Preparing Your Home (Nest) for Life With a Bird," "Baby Bird's Travel Checklist," and one that will tear your heart out, "The Beginning of the Joshua Foundation."

The "Entrees and Side Dishes for You and Your Bird" section looked fun. A lot of the recipes call for cheese, fat, and sugars. Although, I don't think our birds, especially the smaller ones, should have much of this, the recipes could be modified so you are comfortable with them and otherwise might be great as a sometimes treat. Other recipe sections include "Breads and Pastries," "Vegetable and Fruit Dishes," "Potatoes and Eggs," the entrees section, and "Treats."

Sprinkled (pun intended) throughout are a few birdie stories, each of which you will need to have a box of tissues close by to read. An index in the back allows you to look up recipes by main ingredients or recipe title.

The authors have no veterinary background. In fact, all of them are partners in a CPA firm. But they have a love for parrots, especially those in need, and I think have done a good job of putting together a variety of recipes for our birdies with discriminating palates.

First off, this book is so poorly written that I can't believe the author ever passed first grade! The first paragraph introduces a new idea in each sentence, none of which quite relate to the other, and the sum of which reads like a TV Guide synopsis of A Very Important History of the Modernist World. In the second paragraph, the author puffs himself up in the worst professorial hot air by stating that people constantly ask him for his list of the 100 Best this and that of the last century---yeah, they probably ask him this when they have the misfortune of being cornered by him at a cocktail party and want to change the subject! Secondly, while the idea behind this book is fascinating, the arguments are misdirected, scholarly blather that turns jazz, literature, and art into a bore. And I think he completely misses the perfect example that would make his argument: Django Reinhardt, who not only pioneered jazz guitar but was also a prolific modernist painter. The book is beautiful, however, with gorgeous design and stunning reproduction of artwork and photos. Still, I want my money back!

It's an extremely rare thing for me to buy a book after only a few minutes perusal, but that's what I did with this one. It didn't seem to matter what page I turned to: I was met with such an abundance of ambitious and adventurous observations, not only on Jazz, but on The Arts in general, that I could scarcely believe my luck. I felt like I was getting a bargain!

I can only compare Mr. Appel's lively and perceptive book to two other favorites of mine: "Mystery Train" by Greil Marcus, and "Trickster Makes This World" by Lewis Hyde. In fact, you could say that Appel does for Jazz here what "Train" did for Rock and Roll. He even goes Marcus one better by deconstructing actual record labels and, like Marcus, he wears his loves on his sleeve. I don't think you'll read a better informed or more affectionate analysis of the career and art of Louis Armstrong, who strides through this book as Elvis and the Sex Pistols did through Marcus' "Train" and "Lipstick Traces", respectively. If you were to read this book only for what he has to say about Armstrong, you'd get more than your money's worth. And he's not afraid to challenge some long established notions, either: Are Armstrong's Hot Five and Hot Seven recordings really the high water mark of his art? To read any other critic, you'd think so. One of this book's many refreshing accomplishments is its defense of Armstrong's lesser known work and his struggle to appeal to his jazz base while having to court a pop audience.

The remarkable thing about this wonderful book is that this is only one aspect of it. One page of Appel's book seems to throw out more light on the connections between disparate aspects of 20th Century culture than other people's entire books. The puns and seeming improvisation in the writing are well suited to the subject at hand and allow Mr. Appel to bring together topics that normally wouldn't share the same page. Tex Avery? Armstrong? Picasso? What's going on here? We may live in an age far more accepting of blurring the line between "high" and "low" culture, but we've still got a long way to go, and Mr. Appel's book successfully demonstrates that Art is not created in a vacuum.

This doesn't really begin to hint at the riches of this book. I haven't even mentioned the stories of Mr. Appel's first-hand experiences. This confirmed Stravinsky addict, with a shelf's worth of books on the subject, had never read the story related here of the time Stravinsky met Charlie Parker (a meeting that's sort of emblematic of the whole book). And the rabid Joycean in me was delighted by the analysis of "Ulysses", not an easy accomplishment after years of tired repitition in journal after academic journal.

Anyone with even a passing interest in Jazz, Art, or 20th Century culture in general, and who enjoys adventurous cultural commentary, needs to read this book. Profusely illustrated with photographs and reproductions that help him make his points, "Jazz Modernism" is, like its subject, breathtakingly alive and ready to show you a good time.

Callaghan was in some ways a pivotal political figure. He not only lead the Labour party to a critical defeat which not only saw the conservatives dominate Britain for a record period but his loss of office led to the destruction of everything he stood for. That is the union movement, Britain's place as a manufacturing nation and the notion of the labour party being a working class movement.

The writer of the book has been absorbed by Callaghan's career and has come to like him (as did most of the British Electorate). His biography thus lacks a sense of the tragedy of Callaghan's life and the failure of his Prime Minister Ship and the desolation which resulted.

Instead we get a picture of a man on the right of the labour movement who was a decent man and tried in his political career to stand for what he thought was right.

A readable biography which looks to much at the man and perhaps not enough at the political context.

James Callaghans political life covers so much ground over such a period of time,that even at 750 pages this is a breezy read. It enscapsulates an interesting and significant period of Britains history and this well written biography neatly captures the feel of these times. Callaghan's premiership has often been perhaps judged rather too harsely with the memories of the final period, rather than earlier acheivements being to the forefront of most peoples minds. this attempts to be a revisionist biography and in truth the author is a little too reverential towards and uncritical of his subject.

This book is too bore to read. Hard to understand (maybe I am dumb) and unclear pictures. Too few pictures & not to mention all of them are black & white. A good fishing book should have many color picture or photo, it can helps you understand easier and better. There are many better & cheaper fishing books in the market to buy. This is the book that you won't want to 'LOOK' at it for a second time.

A while back I was involved in a thread on the Internet discussing bass books. Several of the participants agreed that Bass Fishing Fundamentals was one of the best, if not the best, bass book ever published. Those anglers will be happy because here is a newly revised version of that book. It has been extensively rewritten, new photos added, and has all new illustrations. He begins with a short chapter on bass habitat and follows that with one on bass biology. Included is coverage of the different types of lures and how to fish them. Boats, rods, reels, and line are all here, along with playing, landing and releasing bass, and fishing in vegetation. Schultz has covered it all, including a chapter on taking the big one. He ended the Bass strike motivation section with this great thought:

Bass are not high-class jewel thieves. They are thugs, the street toughs of the underwater world. Their nature is to be compulsively aggressive. They are repeat offenders, unreformable. And it is this aspect of their feeding behavior that so endears them to anglers.

If it is possible for a book to contain everything you need to know to catch bass, this could be it

This book isn't quite as bad as "A Woman Rides the Beast" by David Hunt, although the later is much more entertaining.

Like most modern Protestants, Armstrong tries painfully hard to convince the reader that the reformers were in step with the modern American evangelical movement. He even goes as far as calling them the "Evangelical Reformers" every time they are mentioned. Nowhere does he state the fact that Luther and Calvin hated each other, nowhere does he mention Luther's theology of "Sin and sin boldly," nowhere does he quote the early Church Fathers to back up his claims, nowhere does he even attempt to explain away the countless Biblical verses that run contrary to his theology. The list goes on and on.

One of the most outlandish charges Armstrong makes is that the Church never even used the title "Catholic" until the fifteenth century. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

If you want to learn history at third grade level, or if you want to understand what goes on inside the mind of a fundamentalist, read this book. Otherwise, waste your brain cells on something more useful.

This book does a fairly accurate job of delineating the differences between Catholic and evangelical beliefs, including some subtle areas that are often misunderstood by members of both groups. For instance:

* In the evangelical vocabulary, "faith" is a sense of assurance of one's salvation, and "justification" is a one-time salvific event.

* In the Catholic vocabulary, "faith" is intellectual belief in Christ, and "justification" is an ongoing process of growing in holiness.

* The Mass isn't a new sacrifice. It's a re-offering of Christ's initial sacrifice.

Where Armstrong fails, though, is in his attempt to disprove Catholic beliefs. Sometimes he gives inadequate evidence, and sometimes he gives no evidence at all - apparently assuming we'll agree that the Catholic view is "obviously" incorrect. (For instance, he claims that the Real Presence is "clearly" unscriptural, while admitting that Christians have believed in it from the earliest centuries all the way to the Reformation. Surely it can't be that "clearly" wrong, if even Luther believed in it?) He also mentions that former Protestant minister Scott Hahn converted to Catholicism because he became convinced, through years of scholarship, that the Reformation doctrines of "sola scriptura" and "sola fide" were unbiblical innovations. You'd think Armstrong would go on to explain and refute Hahn's reasoning, or at least give sources where we can find counter-arguments. But he doesn't.

Hmm. Does this mean Scott Hahn was correct? Since all Armstrong's claims against Catholicism are based on "sola fide" and "sola scriptura", it's an important question.

If you're an evangelical who wants to know more about Catholic beliefs, or a well-informed Catholic who wants to know more about evangelical Protestantism, this book could be a useful starting point. But read some Catholic apologetics books too (like Catholic for a Reason, Catholicism and Fundamentalism, or Surprised by Truth). They give strong arguments in favor of Catholicism, which evangelical authors have yet to refute. Read them prayerfully. You might be the one who's surprised.

John Armstrong's _The Catholic Mystery_ makes for a quick, easy read, a succinct refresher on the essential differences between Protestants & Catholics, differences that have not faded in the 500 years since the Reformation. Armstrong does not intend this book to be a thorough, scholarly study. Instead, it is designed as a simple reminder, a reminder to contemporaries about the bases on which the Protestant Reformers took their stand -- sola scriputura, gratia, Christus, fide, etc. I (as a historian & a thoughtful Protestant) found nothing with which to take issue in regards to either Armstrong's history or his theology. He provides just enough historical background to give his readers a sense of time & place. He quotes just enough official Catholic documentation to effectively illustrate that the issues over which the Reformers fought still remain. For this reason, I found the book most helpful.

One will have to look elsewhere for a detailed, scholarly discourse into the history behind & the theology emerging out of the Protestant Reformation. One will have to look elsewhere for an intricate historical understanding & defense of modern Catholic theology. _The Catholic Mystery_ is a place to begin, not a destination unto itself. Readers would be wise to keep this in mind & not expect this book to more than what Armstrong intended. It's a starting point, good for either a Protestant seeking to understand the essence of Catholicism or a Catholic seeking to understand substance of Protestantism.

I found myself challenged by Armstrong's reminder that both Protestants & Catholics continue to share a common acceptance of early church doctrine, as prescribed in the early church creeds. It is only over the mid to late Medieval theological understanding of redemption for which the Reformers objected. I also appreciated Armstrong's reminder that it is in the Scriptures themselves (not in the Eucharist, in ancient tradition or ritual, or in subjective person experience) where the Reformers believed we meet God most clearly & resolutely. This is why preaching God's word is the focal point & climax to all Protestant worship services.

I only take issue with Armstrong's conclusion, where he restates the differences between Protestantism & Catholicism most starkly. Despite Vatican II, Catholics must still look at Protestants as Xn brothers lacking in most of what is essential to fully experiencing the Xn faith (the Eucharist, ancient tradition & ritual, participation is a church directly descended from Apostolic authority, the headship of the Pope, etc.), while Protestants must continue to look at Catholicism as ultimately heretical in their presentation of the Gospel (particularly in the matter of Redemption) as recorded for us by the Apostles in the New Testament. However, it is my understanding that Catholicism, when interpreted properly, ultimately points the believer toward Xt, whether that's Xt through the church, Xt through the saints, Xt through Mary, Xt through the Eucharist, Xt through tradition & ancient ritual, Xt through the institution of the Pope, or Xt through some religious experience, Xt through a relic, or Xt through a religious order. Ultimately, when all is said & done, Catholicism is pointing the believer toward Xt. It is not necessary for a practicing Catholic to pray to the saints, pray the rosary, use a relic, etc. What is necessary is a conviction of, focus on, & trust in Xt.

It is just that, in my judgment, with all the superfluous theological & institutional layers Catholicism wraps around Xt & the plain Gospel as presented by the New Testament, there is too much to distract the believer from Xt Himself, too much to convolute and/or distort the simple truths of the Gospel message. Much room is left for error, either corporately as a church or individually as a believer. There are too many Catholics who simply do not understand the true teachings of their church, while the Reformer suggested that over the long 1500 year history of the Xn Church theological errors or misrepresentations had interjected themselves. Even so, is it not possible for a Catholic believer to follow the sign posts & come to a true, proper understanding of Xt, even without all their theological I's dotted? Is it our proper theological understanding that saves us or Xt? Is it not possible to fail to possess a purely Biblical understanding of salvation, and yet trust in Xt enough to ultimately gain the reward of heaven? This is not to suggest that I am fine with contemporary Catholicism. I firmly believe that the Reformation was a necessary & needed outcome, however unfortunate. It is, in my judgment, better to remove as much possible misunderstanding & distraction from the essence of the Gospel than to unintentionally lead someone astray. But, this does imply that we should assume that all Catholics are heretics & unable to possess true salvation. Now, to Armstrong's credit, he never states or even implies that all Catholics are themselves heretics, just that the many Catholic teachings are misleading enough to be heretical. Perhaps this point represents more my intellectual struggle than anything in Armstrong's work itself.

"Moonlight" by John Walsh is an embarassment to honest Lincoln scholarship. It is a book with enormous potential to illustrate one of Abraham Lincoln's most famous legal cases, but instead it weaves a narrative feculent with specious logic; the factual assertions of unknown, unknowable and unproveable theories; and assumption after assumption after assumption. Walsh proves some important points, and makes good use of some primary and secondary sources. He offers a detailed account of the murder, the trial and the outcome that cannot be found elsewhere. However, the positive attributes of the book become overshadowed by Walsh's outrageous assertions of supposition as fact, his assertions without qualification or citation, and his complete reliance, as unassailable proof and fact, on the second-hand interview of a trial juror 50 years after the trial. More than once Walsh makes unknowable and unproveable assertions, then admits he can't prove them, then dismisses this serious circumstance as unimportant. For example: "That the charge was levelled during Lincoln's senatorial campaign of 1858 is stated in many sources but I have not been able to document it." (p 155) "Moonlight" is a lost opportunity. The frighteningly childish writing quality, the fanciful indulgences, suppositions, specious logic, appearance of questionable sources and Walsh's own obvious insularity in his investigative objective, make this book a sham, and an insult to the field of historical research.

This is nearly a very good book. Walsh has done credible research and his bibliography is helpful. He clarifys the issues in the almanac trial and provides a picture of Lincoln at work as a defense attorney as few have. BUT.. In his introduction Walsh says, "no fictional coloring has been added" and eveything "rests squarely on documented sources." If only that were so. The tone of the book is like an over-ripe romance novel. I counted two !s and five usues of italics for emphasis in the introduction alone. He virtually admits he can not prove any of his more florid conclusions. A defense attorney is not on a quest for the truth. He or she need only make the prosecution's case look uncertain, which is what Lincoln did. Walsh states that Lincoln could not help the man convicted of killing Metzer, "without endangering Duff [Lincoln's client.]"
Duff had already been aquitted. He could not have been tried for the same crime twice. It is a shame that with all the good work he did Walsh did not present the case in a factual matter. he could have raised very interesting ethical questions about the role of a defense attorney with a very probably guilty client. He did not.

I think this book is an interesting evocation of the ethical scruples of Lincoln as lawyer. Contrary to the conclusion drawn by the author, the sources he relies upon demonstrate that Lincoln was ethical in the zealous representation of his client, an accused murderer. Even under today's legal standards, Lincoln would have been correct to instruct a witness that he was only interested in the witness's ability to testify on a single factual aspect of the trial and to instruct the witness to tell him nothing else except the truth about that single fact. During his preparation for trial, when the witness tried to stray from his instructions and inform Lincoln of other observations, Lincoln would have been within his right to interrupt and remind him that he mustn't offer additional observations beyond the fact requested.

Even today we instruct juries that they may believe all, part, or none of a witness's testimony. Lawyers are held to no different standards in their use of witnesses at trial except lawyers may not offer a witness whose testimony the lawyer believes would commit a fraud upon the court. Lincoln never placed this witness on the stand to elicit any testimony other than what the witness stated to be the truth. Thus the claim that Lincoln "suborned perjury" is naive and insulting. For all that, I enjoyed the underlying research, and the author's exposition of it. It does strike me that consultation with an attorney would have vastly improved the history and dampened the sensationalism.