Rating: 
Summary: Find a different textbook....
Review: I wanted to be fair after suffering through Physical Chemistry by Peter Atkins last year, but this book is every bit as horrible as I feared. My instructor has offered to give two extra credit points for every mistake we find, and I accumulated 8 points this morning while working in Chapter 4. At this rate I won't have to do anything else in the class and will get a solid A. Sadly, though, I will have learned NO inorganic chemistry in the meantime.
Rating: 
Summary: Iorganic Chemistry by D. F. Shriver, P. W. Atkins
Review: If after reading of dozens of chemistry textbooks you still have a mess in your head and feeling chemistry is something very tricky, this is the right book to put things on their places.
Rating: 
Summary: Good scope, difficult to read, many errors
Review: Perhaps I didn't pay as much attention to the 2nd edition, but it seems to me that this 3rd edition of Shriver and Atkins is not as well written and contains more errors than its predecessor. Or perhaps, the other author of the previous two editions, Cooper Langford, was the best writer of the three.First, the good points. I chose this book as the text for my 3rd year inorganic courses because of the scope. No other textbook out there covers the same breadth of material. Meissler/Tarr and Cotton/Wilkinson both suffer from too heavy an emphasis on metal-based chemistry, which doesn't help those of us teaching 2 half-courses in inorganic chemistry - one on the main group, one on transition metals. The material has been kept current with examples from the (relatively) recent literature, something other texts do not do well. Now for the bad. Atkin's books are usually difficult to read, but at least they are rigourous and complete (e.g., his Physical Chemistry, which I find an invaluable reference). Unfortunately, in this book he does not improve his prose, and the thoroughness is lacking, as well as the profusion of errors make it difficult and confusing for the student. What does this all mean? Someone needs to write an inorganic text that is exactly this book, except better written. I will continue to use this text, but I will continue to check all the other new ones in the hope of finding a better one.
Rating:
Summary: Good scope, difficult to read, many errors
Review: Perhaps I didn't pay as much attention to the 2nd edition, but it seems to me that this 3rd edition of Shriver and Atkins is not as well written and contains more errors than its predecessor. Or perhaps, the other author of the previous two editions, Cooper Langford, was the best writer of the three. First, the good points. I chose this book as the text for my 3rd year inorganic courses because of the scope. No other textbook out there covers the same breadth of material. Meissler/Tarr and Cotton/Wilkinson both suffer from too heavy an emphasis on metal-based chemistry, which doesn't help those of us teaching 2 half-courses in inorganic chemistry - one on the main group, one on transition metals. The material has been kept current with examples from the (relatively) recent literature, something other texts do not do well. Now for the bad. Atkin's books are usually difficult to read, but at least they are rigourous and complete (e.g., his Physical Chemistry, which I find an invaluable reference). Unfortunately, in this book he does not improve his prose, and the thoroughness is lacking, as well as the profusion of errors make it difficult and confusing for the student. What does this all mean? Someone needs to write an inorganic text that is exactly this book, except better written. I will continue to use this text, but I will continue to check all the other new ones in the hope of finding a better one.
Rating:
Summary: confusing way of presenting concepts without proper emphases
Review: Some important points in a chapter are only explained in several lines or not explained clearly. A full understanding of the concepts and chemical process cannot be achieved after reading the book. And some equations in the book jump out suddenly without being explained, which makes them much less convincing and makes the readers confused. This is not suitable for a common understanding process and a mechanical memorisation of the formulas and concepts is not good for understanding. For the chapter on quantum mechanics, a physics textbook is much better than this book. The concepts in a physics book are much more precise and rigorous than those in this book.
Rating:
Summary: errors, errors, errors,
Review: The Preface of the THIRD edition (1999) states " We have taken particular care to ensure that the text is free of errors". If this isn't misleading, I don't know what is. The books is loaded with errors, misprints, and poorly worded sentenses. Many of the imperfections are carried over from the previous edition but new ones also appear. No students should be required to buy this book until a clean second printing is available. The second edition (1999) of Miessler and Tarr contains errors but at least the solutions manual comes with a list of "the corrections that are most important for student use of the text".
Rating:
Summary: excellent introductory text
Review: This is a clear and concise introductory text. If you need detail, however, Cotton and Wilkinson is the way to go.
Rating:
Summary: Good reference book, but......
Review: This is an excellent reference book, but a poor text for students learning about inorganic for the first time. The discussion (Chapter 4) on molecular symmetry and point groups is INSANE. The prof who taught the course provided a number of supplementary materials on point groups, probably because this chapter is so flawed. The second part of the text is somewhat better than the first... Personally, I learned a lot from the discussions in the Guide to Solutions manual that accompanies the text; if I hadn't had that, I'd have definitely received a lower grade in the class. Overall, an average-level textbook.
Rating:
Summary: Good reference book, but......
Review: This is an excellent reference book, but a poor text for students learning about inorganic for the first time. The discussion (Chapter 4) on molecular symmetry and point groups is INSANE. The prof who taught the course provided a number of supplementary materials on point groups, probably because this chapter is so flawed. The second part of the text is somewhat better than the first... Personally, I learned a lot from the discussions in the Guide to Solutions manual that accompanies the text; if I hadn't had that, I'd have definitely received a lower grade in the class. Overall, an average-level textbook.
| 
