Rating: 
Summary: A poor text
Review: A couple of years ago I taught two computability courses during the same semester. One of the courses was in the undergraduate program while the other was in the graduate program. As I was a visitor, I did not have a hand in picking either text. This text had been selected for the undergradate version of the course. At the time, I wrote a review for the book we used for the graduate course saying how much better it was than the Linz book. The Linz book not only covered less material, but it offered poorer explanations. Although I was a visitor, I endeavored to warn succeeding instructors of the undergraduate course against using the Linz book and sincerely hope that it was not used the next year. A couple of days ago, I received email from someone thinking of using the text for the graduate course asking me to identify the Linz book which I mentioned, but did not identify, in my original review. This request prompted me to write this review. Regardless, the Linz book is a poorly developed and presented text. As there are several superior texts, there is little reason to adopt this one. This book is suitable neither for well-prepared nor ill-prepared students. There is too little material for the well-prepared and insufficient clarity of exposition for the ill-prepared. In all, a poor combination of anemic material and exposition.
Rating: 
Summary: A very good introduction indeed
Review: Contrary to what some other reviewers claim, this book is perfectly suitable as a tutorial and course book for computer science and mathematics students at the academic level. It aims to lay a firm and necessary theoretical groundwork for various fields in software and hardware design. Its best quality perhaps is its potential to convey the ability to write sound formal proofs. The proofs are definitely *not* hard, with only few mind-challenging exceptions. I would especially recommend it as a preparatory book for an advanced course on compiler design.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a good book
Review: First off, let me say this book did not confuse me. It's just very poorly written. If this was the only Automata book I ever read, my review would not mean as much. On the contrary, I have read 4-5 Automata books and have taught the topic numerous times. I urge teachers and students to avoid this book. If you would like a great book covering this material, get Dexter Kozen's Automata and Computability. That book is so well written and elegant that it puts most of the other books to shame. It is one of the top CS books on my list along with SICP, CLRS, and a few others. In addition, the "OLD" version of Hopcroft and Ullman is pretty good but the newer version with Motwani is bad. Anyways, I hope this helps some of you who are looking for a good book to read.
Rating:
Summary: Not a good book
Review: First off, let me say this book did not confuse me. It's just very poorly written. If this was the only Automata book I ever read, my review would not mean as much. On the contrary, I have read 4-5 Automata books and have taught the topic numerous times. I urge teachers and students to avoid this book. If you would like a great book covering this material, get Dexter Kozen's Automata and Computability. That book is so well written and elegant that it puts most of the other books to shame. It is one of the top CS books on my list along with SICP, CLRS, and a few others. In addition, the "OLD" version of Hopcroft and Ullman is pretty good but the newer version with Motwani is bad. Anyways, I hope this helps some of you who are looking for a good book to read.
Rating: 
Summary: A Good Introduction to a Very Abstract Subject
Review: Formal languages and automata are highly theoretical topics. They would be difficult for anyone to explain. It is not fair to judge this book by the same rules that you would judge say a C++ book or a database book. Linz does as good a job as any I have seen in explaining this difficult material to a person learning it for the first time. I suspect that the reviewers that gave this book a bad review have not seen the competition. My experience is that this is the easiest to understand of the bunch.
Rating:
Summary: This is the worse book I have ever read
Review: I am a computer science student at F.I.U. and unfortunately I was required to buy and use this book. The book is extremely bad. First of all it does not give any anwser for any of the exercises. The explanations are so superficial that you never get the point right unless you get some external help. It has just too few bad designed examples for each theorem and definition (1 or 2). It seems that this book was created with the sole purpose of getting profits by requering students to buy it. I strongly recommend not to buy this book unless your are required like I was.
Rating:
Summary: Worst book ever
Review: I am a pretty good student of comp sci with a perfect 4.0 GPA and I can really tell if a book is good or not by readign it. This book is probably the most boruing and useless book I have ever bought. The whole book s is written like an essay. Formatting is horrible.. YTou wouldn't know where an example question ends and where its answer begins. I got lost while reading the book so many timess. as the author jumps from one point to another and never comes back to the original point. Also I could have definately appreciated it if the books had more examples (and better ones) than what it has right now.
Rating:
Summary: Waste of a text
Review: I am not an instructor in the course, like some of the other reviewers. I am actually a student working at an undergraduate level, as a Computer Science major. The poor explanations with the sectional exercises prompted me to write the review. In my honest opinion, the book is poor. It seems like it rushed for publication. Not only are the explanations poor, but the solutions for the in-book exercises are as well. I mention this, since all of my homework is lifted from this text. The book lists back-of-the-book solutions. Sometimes it will list solutions for the wrong problems. Other times it will have incorrect solutions (especially with grammar productions.) My advice is to avoid the text. If it is required reading for the course, then look for a used copy at best to purchase.
Rating:
Summary: not as bad as the others!
Review: I can't believe all the bad reviews I'm reading. If these students want a book that's HARD to learn from, pick up Elements of the Theory of Computation by Papadimitriou! That was our course text, and the Linz book was the alternative text which was _WAY_ easier to understand.
Rating:
Summary: Worst Book Ever Owned
Review: I completely share Reviewer #1's comments. I, too was required to buy this book for my computer science course. The book is so poorly written, examples never adequately explained, and proofs are at best puzzling and confusing. This is another example where a textbook was produced for the purpose of making money rather than educating as good textbooks should be.
| 
