<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: it makes numeric sense
Review: i had the pain to use this book for my undergrad. coursework for a 200 level class at Cal Poly. Contrary to the other reviewers, i believe the exercises are mediocre, and the material presented lack depth to provide a solid grounding to numerical analysis. Codes are inconveniently written in fortran-97? instead of the more readable pseudo-code. It may provide a good application supplementary for engineering students, but i strongly advise against it for mathematics undergrads. No fun. Lots of handwaving and smoking mirrors.
Rating:
Summary: it makes numeric sense
Review: i had the pain to use this book for my undergrad. coursework for a 200 level class at Cal Poly. Contrary to the other reviewers, i believe the exercises are mediocre, and the material presented lack depth to provide a solid grounding to numerical analysis. Codes are inconveniently written in fortran-97? instead of the more readable pseudo-code. It may provide a good application supplementary for engineering students, but i strongly advise against it for mathematics undergrads. No fun. Lots of handwaving and smoking mirrors.
Rating: 
Summary: Maybe i'm just biased...
Review: I'm biased because i had the good fortune to take Intro to Numeric Analysis from Ken Atkinson himself. I beta-tested this edition of the text, so my copy is in a loose-leaf binder. Some reviewers have complained that the book is difficult because examples are in FORTRAN rather than C. I disagree. The real meat of the book is written in mathematical form; what source he provides is merely a convenience. When i took his class, most of the students (myself included) implemented in C rather than FORTRAN. No problem, because he was looking for correct results, not reviewing code. And yes, this book assumes a solid knowledge of calculus, linear algebra, basic differential equations, and discrete logic. Did you think you'd be able to code mathematics without *understanding* it? If you understand the math in the first place, his implementations are very clear. If you don't understand the math, no amount of clarity will save you. The real beauty, for me, was how he logically built a progression of topics, with each step providing the foundation for the next one. It was like seeing two years of college math in miniature.
Rating:
Summary: Maybe i'm just biased...
Review: I'm biased because i had the good fortune to take Intro to Numeric Analysis from Ken Atkinson himself. I beta-tested this edition of the text, so my copy is in a loose-leaf binder. Some reviewers have complained that the book is difficult because examples are in FORTRAN rather than C. I disagree. The real meat of the book is written in mathematical form; what source he provides is merely a convenience. When i took his class, most of the students (myself included) implemented in C rather than FORTRAN. No problem, because he was looking for correct results, not reviewing code. And yes, this book assumes a solid knowledge of calculus, linear algebra, basic differential equations, and discrete logic. Did you think you'd be able to code mathematics without *understanding* it? If you understand the math in the first place, his implementations are very clear. If you don't understand the math, no amount of clarity will save you. The real beauty, for me, was how he logically built a progression of topics, with each step providing the foundation for the next one. It was like seeing two years of college math in miniature.
Rating: 
Summary: will need supplimentation
Review: Of course this book assumes (advanced?) knowledge of Calc 1 & 2 as well as linear algebra and preferably Dif. EQ. These are all prerequisites for the course in which the book is used. That being said, it is quite annoying when the book *completely* skips over intermediate steps involving calculus leaving the student scratching his head. I find myself with my nose more in my Calc. books trying to figure out what the steps leading to the answer rather than learning Num. Analysis. Would have been nice if at least some intermediate steps were added to most problems, but hey, this is college and hand holding should not be assumed.
There are 3 main gripes which contribute to the low rating.
1. The Cost. For the price of the book, (considering the way the material is presented (see 2.) there should be a solution manual bundled with it. (see 3.)
2. The explanations of the material is cut and dry and not verbose at all, [which adds 2 stars to an original 0 rating] however, there is usually only one example for a topic, followed by 10-15 excercises associated with that topic. This often leads to pure frustration and having to "google" for supplimentary material to help me through the problems due to the fact that the example is far more elemantary than the excercises.
3. Lack of solutions. Coupled with the lack of GOOD examples is the lack of solutions for the excercises you just struggled to drudge through. Chapters that typically have 10-15 problems, some with sub-problems in them usually have 5 or so solutions in the back. (so if there is say question 1, parts a-h, question 2, question 3 a - k....there would be a solution for question 1 part c, question 3 part g...).
If you take this course and this is the required text, pray that your professor has great lectures and notes(neither of which my prof. has) or be prepared to spend many hours on google looking for other references.
Rating:
Summary: A strict NO for starters
Review: The author presumes that the reader has an advanced knowledge of calculus even though the book is intended for use by undergrads.the content in the chapters of the book are not enough to solve the questions at the end of ech chapter.if you are looking for an introductory course in NA dont even think of using this book.
<< 1 >>
| 
