Rating: 
Summary: The Best Book of Calculus(In english)
Review: I'm from Chile, where I had the chance to meet this book. My professor of calculus used it as his guide book. I agree with one revision I read about this book, in order that this is the best book to learn Calculus, and I'm not the only one who's saying it. Stewart's explanation about Integral Calulus in one variable it's astonishing. But, Since last year there is a new book of Calculus that completes Stewart's:"Calculo..." written by C. Pita Ruiz, an colombian professor that takes the multivariable calculus and only with more space, but with the same view of stewart, making it easier than the fast review of the book.
Rating:
Summary: Good book....with time
Review: I took Calc II and III using this textbook. At first, I thought it was practically gibberish. After the second semester of usage, I love it! Stewart is clear and while his formalisms may be a pain, they are necessary. Pick up a book on Advanced Calculus/analysis and then you will be glad that you have Stewart. Get "Calc for the Clueless" as well as the Schaum's outline and you will be good to go.
Rating:
Summary: Great book for beginners
Review: I am a reader from Czech Republic and I have to state that I have never seen a nicer book about calculus for beginners. I wish all unhappy people about this book would see books students in eastern European countrees are using. If somebody does not understand this book he should review his ability to learn mathematics. This book is written as stated above for beginners, who want quickly learn calculus without worring about proofs and theoretical background of calculus. You can find many color pictures of geometrical representation of calculus stuff, which can be sometimes quite helpful. My only complain is about exercices and review sections etc. I think it should be reduced, because some of them are really dummy. But ok, maybe it is too subjective. Please, excuse my english.
Rating: 
Summary: This Book Stinks
Review: Again I will say that James Stewart should not be writing calculus textbooks. His book stinks. All it has is a bunch of theroems that are not throughly explained. He has no clear and concise examples to illustrate how the theroems apply to calculus. There are way better calculus textbooks than this one. This is one of the most poorly written calculus textbooks on the teaching market. This book should not even be considered for a learning tool for calculus. In order for this book to be as good as the other calculus textbooks, HE MUST give plenty examples in doing calculus problems on EVERY section. He must make sure that each example is concise and clear with NO mathematical steps skipped. As long as James Stewart's calculus textbook keeps taking shortcuts in illustrating the concepts and methodology of calculus, it will always be a low quality calculus textbook. That is plain and simple.
Rating:
Summary: This Books Stinks Plain and Simple
Review: As far as I'm concerned James Stewart needs to retire and never write calculus textbooks again. His book is full of senseless theroems with no CLEAR AND CONCISE EXAMPLES. He has a bunch of stupid examples that are not complete. For example, this pathetic textbook may have an example that takes 5 steps. He will illustrate steps 1 3 and 5 but this lazy textbook won't have steps 2 and 4. Now how can you figure out one step if you don't know the other step? Explain that to me Mr. James Stewart?Additionally, he needs at least 8 to 10 examples per section, not 2 or three examples this "piece of junk" textbook that he has. You want a real good calculus textbook? DO NOT LOOK to this Calculus textbook from James Stewart. It REALLY STINKS BIGTIME. Any professor that uses this calculus textbook to teach his\her students is probably getting a bribe from the publisher from this textbook and James Stewart. Also that professor may not be informed of better textbooks that are more user friendly, easier to understand and have plenty of concise examples. Bottom line the James Stewart Calculus textbook stinks and should be burned.
Rating:
Summary: Not Written for Students
Review: I am taking calculus for the first time this semester. I took precalculus last semester and got a B. This semester I have the same professor and I am getting a D. The only difference in the two courses is that in precalculus I had a book that was written with clear explanations and examples. Stewart's Calculus book just doesn't help me. I just don't believe that Mr. Stewart has ever taught real students. His examples seem to be written for other professors, not for students like me. I do not recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: Inferior text, though popular
Review: This is the early transcendentals version of Stewart's calculus. The title of the book is quite appropriate, in that to learn calculus well, one must transcend the Stewart approach early and often. I found my self reading another text (Simmon's Calculus and Analytic Geometry) as an antidote to this dry, disjointed, lifeless tome. Stewart takes an inconsistent (sometimes rigorous, sometimes intuitive) approach toward teaching the calculus. It seems as if he has attempted to be all things to all people. Though he may have attempted to present the subject in both an intuitive (to motivate the typical student) and rigorous (to satisfy the professor) manner, he failed to deliver on either.
The text is replete with pretty diagrams and some historical diversions, which read as canned, trivial snippets. In spite of this eye candy, the mathematical exposition is poor. Most proofs read as shorthand notes to one who already understands the subject. Is it analysis or basic calculus? Stewart seems to have a schizophrenic writing manner. On the one hand, he presents examples in "workbook" (i.e. Schaum's outline) form, so that if one wishes to solve a particular sort of problem, one might find it here. He does not seem able, however, to meld problem solving with rigor in a coherent manner. So an abbreviated proof is done, with several relevant steps (relevant, that is, to the beginner) omitted. What function does this serve for a pre-analysis student? A proof that might take 10 steps is presented in 4. What is the point of this approach? Perhaps so as to ward off accusations that a particular subject was not touched upon. The book is expensive and bloated. Though the "official" rendering of the page numbers is 781, there are approximately 130 other pages devoted to appendices (some as advertisements for other, i.e. ancillary, materials). Note, this text is intended for a 2 semester Calculus sequence. It seems inappropriate, perhaps fraudulent,that Stewart devoted 900+ pages for this task, and yet failed to present the material in an interesting and efficient manner. Given his insistence upon this secondary material, I ask Stewart - did you ever intend for this book to be relatively self-contained for the serious first year scholar, or did you expect the professor or CD-ROM to fill in the gaps in your exposition? In spite of the suggestion to buy expensive ancillaries, I diverted myself to the library where I discovered Simmons' brilliant exposition. This text provides what Stewart does not - a good, efficient foundation of the basic calculus in the context of intellectual breadth. When a calculus first-timer reads Simmons, he or she will likely understand exactly why a calculation is being done, as opposed to the Stewart "willy-nilly" approach, as if one is simply calculating for calculations sake, much like working glorified accountancy problems. Calculus is an intellectual masterpiece, but Stewart presents it as disjointed, purposeless exercise solving. I suggest that serious freshman mathematics scholars avoid Stewart. Compare the Stewart text to others in your school library if possible, buy used if necessary, and read something else if the exposition seems problematic. I recommend most highly the George F. Simmon's text Calculus and Analytic Geometry (either the first or second edition). Another promising text is Anton's Calculus: A New Horizon, as more efficient, focused alternatives. These texts allow one to learn first year calculus on one's own, and if one has the benefit of a decent professor, so much the better for one's edification. After Simmons or Anton, one should be well prepared to move on to introductory analysis, such as the work of Michael Spivak (Spivak's Calculus).
Rating:
Summary: Just Say No
Review: My professor made us buy this book this year. It has been a waste. I can't understand the writing and we have found lots of mistakes in the answers. If your professor asks you to buy this book, I suggest getting the class together and telling your teacher "No." There have got to be better calculus books out there. Ask your professor to find a book that at least has correct answers in the back.
Rating:
Summary: Not What It Should Be
Review: This is the first time I have taught freshman calculus in several years. Our department selected Stewart's book about 7 years ago, but I was unaffected by the choice. Now that I am teaching out of the book, I am disappointed and sometimes even angry. The author does not have the crisp logical presentation that I expect of college-level text. The writing has no personality. It is almost like I am looking at the Reader's Digest of calculus books, with one page taken from Book A, another from Book B, and another from Book C. My students do not like the book, and this has created a poor attitude in class. The next time our department meets to discuss calculus texts, I plan to participate in the decision.
Rating:
Summary: I Thought I Was Good at Math, Until this Book
Review: I am in my second semester of calculus, using Calculus by James Stewart. I have never disliked a book as much as this one! It is hard to say what the trouble is. At first glance, it seems like a typical boring math book. But, when you start to read it, the attitude of the author begins to make you feel stupid. The author doesn't talk to students. He says things like "we can see that" or "it is clear that" ... but most of the time I can't see it and it isn't clear. He skips steps in the examples. I have wasted hours trying to make my answer to an exercise fit the one in the back of the book, only to discover in class the next day that the book had an error. My professor says that this is a widely used calculus book. I think it is terrible that a calculus author has become a multi-millionaire by writing a math book that makes students feel dumb. If you are a teacher and are considering this book, please show it to your students first. If they are like me, they will tell you to find a book that is better written.
| 
