The Rough Guide to Portugal (Portugal (Rough Guides))

Rating:
Summary: A great guide book - don't go to Portugal without it!
Review: I have been to Portugal countless times and just like the country itself, the Rough Guide to Portugal never ceases to amaze me. This book is the perfect guide - light enough to carry around in a purse and yet absolutely comprehensive. All regions of Portugal are covered, even small villages are described if they have something of interest. And the way places are described is what makes this book so good - the writing is so witty, so apt, that I find myself rereading sections just for the chuckle. The guide includes tons of maps, precise directions, prices for museums, transportation, hotels, restaurants. The directions are oriented towards non drivers - that is, if you are relying on public transportation or your own two feet to get you around Portugal, then this book is excellent. The recommendations are always right on target and I have always found the information to be accurate. There are no color photographs in my edition which doesn't detract at all from the book. However, the new edition does have some nice pictures.

So, my advice to you dear reader is: Visit Portugal - and take your Rough Guide with you!

Rating:
Summary: A great guide book - don't go to Portugal without it!
Review: I have been to Portugal countless times and just like the country itself, the Rough Guide to Portugal never ceases to amaze me. This book is the perfect guide - light enough to carry around in a purse and yet absolutely comprehensive. All regions of Portugal are covered, even small villages are described if they have something of interest. And the way places are described is what makes this book so good - the writing is so witty, so apt, that I find myself rereading sections just for the chuckle. The guide includes tons of maps, precise directions, prices for museums, transportation, hotels, restaurants. The directions are oriented towards non drivers - that is, if you are relying on public transportation or your own two feet to get you around Portugal, then this book is excellent. The recommendations are always right on target and I have always found the information to be accurate. There are no color photographs in my edition which doesn't detract at all from the book. However, the new edition does have some nice pictures.

So, my advice to you dear reader is: Visit Portugal - and take your Rough Guide with you!

Rating:
Summary: Rough Guide (9th ed.) vs. Lonely Planet (2nd ed.)
Review: This review compares the Rough Guides Portugal (9th ed.) with Lonely Planet Portugal (2nd ed.).

We just returned from 2.5 weeks in Portugal. This was our first trip to Portugal and we took and used extensively the Portugal books from Lonely Planet and Rough Guide. We didn't visit the Algarve or Alentejo, concentrating on Lisbon and north.

Both books were good, but overall we preferred the Rough Guide book. It was better organized and more up to date. It's writing was more incisive, lively, and witty.

Here are some details as I saw them:

LP maps often covered a wider area and had more detail than the RG maps, but they were in smaller type and often difficult to read. On more than one occassion a cab driver pulled out his spectacles to read the LP map.

Rough Guide had more up to date phone numbers. LP did not have the up to date area codes (the leading 0 has been changed to a 2). In addition, for many properties in the north they had a 5 digit phone number, when now they are all six. More disturbingly, they have no update on their website for either the corrected area code or phone numbers. In fact, there was no Portugal update to the guide at all. (I'm not talking of the 'unverified travelers' reports.)

LP provided more detailed information about the nitty-gritty details of traveling, e.g., money, trains, internet access, etc.

RG presented the towns around Aveiro better. It was through it that we learned of Sao Jacinto, Torreira, and so on. These were not indexed in LP. We didn't discover that LP had some information on them until much later because it was more hidden in the Aveiro section. Since we had already decided to not stay in Aveiro we didn't think to look there. Although they were also in the Aveiro section of RG, they had their own headings and were also indexed.

Similarly, RG highlighted Belmonte in the mountains. This town was interesting in itself and also in that it now holds one of Portugal's largest remaining Jewish communities and its new synogogue. Jews had previously worshipped secretly in a town house until 1974, now replaced by the new building. (I'm writing this using a mouse pad I purchased at the Belmonte castle for $1.50 with images of columns from the Mosteiro da Batalha!)

I also preferred RG's treatment of Parque Natural da Serra da Estrela and of Parque Natural de Montesinho.

We used several recommendations for restaurants and accommodations from the books. Their batting averages were about the same: good but not great. One African dance club listed in both books was now a female stip place, as my wife discovered when seeing if the cab had taken us to the right address. (I was waiting in the cab.) I felt they were generally too generous in their evaluation of hotels and restaurants.

Both books had several failings common to them and to other guide books that we've used.

Nearly all the accommodations and restaurants are in tourist areas. We were fortunate to stay in Lisbon in a residential district. It was comforting to leave in the morning and not be surrounded by hordes of fellow tourists. Similarly, we were the only obvious tourists in the local restaurants, some of which were excellent. Nor were we out in the sticks where a car was required. We were right off the #28 tram line, recommended as the best tram to ride simply for riding it in both books.

Several other times during the trip we stayed and ate outside the centro area. In some cases a car would have been needed, but we were only several km out of center. In any case, I think both books should offer more 'out of centro' possibilities, especially when transportation is available.

LP is out front in saying that its reviewers do not stay at all the hotels or eat at all the restaurants they list. I would like it if the reviews would be initialized with the reviewers initials for the ones that they personally tried. This would also allow us to see and evaluate each reviewer's tastes and standards as our trip progressed, not to mention to see which places they really tried. One LP writer (not an author of this book) in discussing restaurants wrote: "As one of those LP writers I can tell you that it is not physically possible to eat even a 'little bit of a meal' in each of those restaurants :-) What we all tend to do is eat at a broad cross-section within the norms of natural eating times and visit the other restaurants and talk to the owner or even the diners if it can be done discretely. In the same vein we don't sleep at every hotel!"

Talk to the owners! Now there's something for an unbiased, disinterested evaluation!

Both books are oriented to train travelers, but they should have some more info on driving too, which is not expensive. For example, neither had a mileage chart between major cities and, more importantly, neither had a chart of expected driving times. Using the 'N' roads which look like major highways can take quite a bit of time because they are mostly two lane roads, often twisty and hilly, and can have a lot of SLOW truck traffic. You'd probably be better off driving on the back roads, both for time and scenery, and for that small village, local feel. But you'd never know it from these books. This complaint isn't restricted to just LP and RG, of course.

In addition, both books were quite short on history, culture and demographics. How religious are the Portuguese? (We were asked on several occassions whether we were 'religioso'.) What is the median and mean income of each of the areas (even of Portugal as a whole) and how does this compare to the rest of western Europe. What are contemporary middle-class Portuguese characteristics?

It wouldn't have taken more than an additional 10 or 15 pages for such information, and it would have made our trip more meaningful.

In sum, again, both guides were good with room for improvement, with our preferring the Rough Guide overall.



Rating:
Summary: Rough Guide (9th ed.) vs. Lonely Planet (2nd ed.)
Review: This review compares the Rough Guides Portugal (9th ed.) with Lonely Planet Portugal (2nd ed.).

We just returned from 2.5 weeks in Portugal. This was our first trip to Portugal and we took and used extensively the Portugal books from Lonely Planet and Rough Guide. We didn't visit the Algarve or Alentejo, concentrating on Lisbon and north.

Both books were good, but overall we preferred the Rough Guide book. It was better organized and more up to date. It's writing was more incisive, lively, and witty.

Here are some details as I saw them:

LP maps often covered a wider area and had more detail than the RG maps, but they were in smaller type and often difficult to read. On more than one occassion a cab driver pulled out his spectacles to read the LP map.

Rough Guide had more up to date phone numbers. LP did not have the up to date area codes (the leading 0 has been changed to a 2). In addition, for many properties in the north they had a 5 digit phone number, when now they are all six. More disturbingly, they have no update on their website for either the corrected area code or phone numbers. In fact, there was no Portugal update to the guide at all. (I'm not talking of the 'unverified travelers' reports.)

LP provided more detailed information about the nitty-gritty details of traveling, e.g., money, trains, internet access, etc.

RG presented the towns around Aveiro better. It was through it that we learned of Sao Jacinto, Torreira, and so on. These were not indexed in LP. We didn't discover that LP had some information on them until much later because it was more hidden in the Aveiro section. Since we had already decided to not stay in Aveiro we didn't think to look there. Although they were also in the Aveiro section of RG, they had their own headings and were also indexed.

Similarly, RG highlighted Belmonte in the mountains. This town was interesting in itself and also in that it now holds one of Portugal's largest remaining Jewish communities and its new synogogue. Jews had previously worshipped secretly in a town house until 1974, now replaced by the new building. (I'm writing this using a mouse pad I purchased at the Belmonte castle for $1.50 with images of columns from the Mosteiro da Batalha!)

I also preferred RG's treatment of Parque Natural da Serra da Estrela and of Parque Natural de Montesinho.

We used several recommendations for restaurants and accommodations from the books. Their batting averages were about the same: good but not great. One African dance club listed in both books was now a female stip place, as my wife discovered when seeing if the cab had taken us to the right address. (I was waiting in the cab.) I felt they were generally too generous in their evaluation of hotels and restaurants.

Both books had several failings common to them and to other guide books that we've used.

Nearly all the accommodations and restaurants are in tourist areas. We were fortunate to stay in Lisbon in a residential district. It was comforting to leave in the morning and not be surrounded by hordes of fellow tourists. Similarly, we were the only obvious tourists in the local restaurants, some of which were excellent. Nor were we out in the sticks where a car was required. We were right off the #28 tram line, recommended as the best tram to ride simply for riding it in both books.

Several other times during the trip we stayed and ate outside the centro area. In some cases a car would have been needed, but we were only several km out of center. In any case, I think both books should offer more 'out of centro' possibilities, especially when transportation is available.

LP is out front in saying that its reviewers do not stay at all the hotels or eat at all the restaurants they list. I would like it if the reviews would be initialized with the reviewers initials for the ones that they personally tried. This would also allow us to see and evaluate each reviewer's tastes and standards as our trip progressed, not to mention to see which places they really tried. One LP writer (not an author of this book) in discussing restaurants wrote: "As one of those LP writers I can tell you that it is not physically possible to eat even a 'little bit of a meal' in each of those restaurants :-) What we all tend to do is eat at a broad cross-section within the norms of natural eating times and visit the other restaurants and talk to the owner or even the diners if it can be done discretely. In the same vein we don't sleep at every hotel!"

Talk to the owners! Now there's something for an unbiased, disinterested evaluation!

Both books are oriented to train travelers, but they should have some more info on driving too, which is not expensive. For example, neither had a mileage chart between major cities and, more importantly, neither had a chart of expected driving times. Using the 'N' roads which look like major highways can take quite a bit of time because they are mostly two lane roads, often twisty and hilly, and can have a lot of SLOW truck traffic. You'd probably be better off driving on the back roads, both for time and scenery, and for that small village, local feel. But you'd never know it from these books. This complaint isn't restricted to just LP and RG, of course.

In addition, both books were quite short on history, culture and demographics. How religious are the Portuguese? (We were asked on several occassions whether we were 'religioso'.) What is the median and mean income of each of the areas (even of Portugal as a whole) and how does this compare to the rest of western Europe. What are contemporary middle-class Portuguese characteristics?

It wouldn't have taken more than an additional 10 or 15 pages for such information, and it would have made our trip more meaningful.

In sum, again, both guides were good with room for improvement, with our preferring the Rough Guide overall.