<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Good breadth of topics but boring and a bit cursory
Review: Wulfsberg's Inorganic Chemistry manages to escape the obvious pitfalls of a first-edition text: it is not similar to other texts already on the market, and it is fairly error-free. Being error-free is no mean feat, especially when you consider that Shriver and Atkin's 3rd (!) edition of their text is rife with mistakes. In fact, in many ways this Wulfsberg offering is better than any other inorganic text on the market. There are also some serious drawbacks, however. First the positive. I've already mentioned the fact that there are few errors. Another BIG adavantage is the scope of the text: it covers the entire periodic table. The introductory chapters (11 of 17) cover general trends, including symmetry, redox, crystal field theory, etc. Only 4 chapters are devoted to that insidious practice of qualitative description of compounds and their physical properties. Finally, the text is arranged so that chapters are roughly independent - it is not a detriment to skip over a chapter here and there if your course content so requires. Unfortunately, these positives are almost evenly balanced by some serious (in my opinion) negatives. For starters, the text is boring! Even I, the professor, find it difficult to read. Part of the problem is that the author seems to think that 2 pages of text is better at explaining something than a half-page picture. This makes for heavy reading when trying to study! Secondly: there is too much hand-waving description relative to hard chemical theory. This may be fine for a 2nd-year level course, but most professors will want a text that has enough depth that they can use it in a 3rd- or 4th-year course as well, and I'm afraid this is a little superficial in places. Finally, I have to question the fact that crystal-field theory has an entire chapter devoted to it, while ligand-field theory (and consquently, symmetry-adapted orbitals) is essentially ignored. In my experience, both as a student and as a prof, anyone who learns LFT finds it much easier and more satisfying than the gross simplifications (and outright errors!) of CFT. I have used this text and Shriver and Atkins's text as assigned books for my 3rd-year inorganic courses. For my money, Shriver and Atkins, in spite of its overemphasis on physical chemistry and numerous errors, is still a better text. However, I'm anxiously looking forward to a second edition of Wulfsberg, as it wouldn't take too much effort to make it a superior product.
Rating:
Summary: Good breadth of topics but boring and a bit cursory
Review: Wulfsberg's Inorganic Chemistry manages to escape the obvious pitfalls of a first-edition text: it is not similar to other texts already on the market, and it is fairly error-free. Being error-free is no mean feat, especially when you consider that Shriver and Atkin's 3rd (!) edition of their text is rife with mistakes. In fact, in many ways this Wulfsberg offering is better than any other inorganic text on the market. There are also some serious drawbacks, however. First the positive. I've already mentioned the fact that there are few errors. Another BIG adavantage is the scope of the text: it covers the entire periodic table. The introductory chapters (11 of 17) cover general trends, including symmetry, redox, crystal field theory, etc. Only 4 chapters are devoted to that insidious practice of qualitative description of compounds and their physical properties. Finally, the text is arranged so that chapters are roughly independent - it is not a detriment to skip over a chapter here and there if your course content so requires. Unfortunately, these positives are almost evenly balanced by some serious (in my opinion) negatives. For starters, the text is boring! Even I, the professor, find it difficult to read. Part of the problem is that the author seems to think that 2 pages of text is better at explaining something than a half-page picture. This makes for heavy reading when trying to study! Secondly: there is too much hand-waving description relative to hard chemical theory. This may be fine for a 2nd-year level course, but most professors will want a text that has enough depth that they can use it in a 3rd- or 4th-year course as well, and I'm afraid this is a little superficial in places. Finally, I have to question the fact that crystal-field theory has an entire chapter devoted to it, while ligand-field theory (and consquently, symmetry-adapted orbitals) is essentially ignored. In my experience, both as a student and as a prof, anyone who learns LFT finds it much easier and more satisfying than the gross simplifications (and outright errors!) of CFT. I have used this text and Shriver and Atkins's text as assigned books for my 3rd-year inorganic courses. For my money, Shriver and Atkins, in spite of its overemphasis on physical chemistry and numerous errors, is still a better text. However, I'm anxiously looking forward to a second edition of Wulfsberg, as it wouldn't take too much effort to make it a superior product.
<< 1 >>
| 
