Best Travel guides (in general)
gtuo
tried many and i find that i like the following in this order:
Thoughts?
Access Press ( saul wurman--but limited cities)
Blue Guides (very detailed, but limited cities)
Lonely Planet
Footprint
Moon
Bradt
Time Out
Fodor's
Frommer's
Rick Steve's
Insight
Baedaker
Michelin
I must admit, that some of these at the bottom, I have only used
sporadically. Also, I am looking for a good guidebook for
Egypt/Israel. Recs?
David Horne
> I must admit, that some of these at the bottom, I have only used
> sporadically. Also, I am looking for a good guidebook for
> Egypt/Israel. Recs?
Not technically Europe now, but I used Let's Go. For Egypt (I've never
been to Israel) it was very useful. Why was it not on your list?
David
--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
Iceman
>Any thoughts on which travel guide series is your favorite, i have
>tried many and i find that i like the following in this order:
>Thoughts?
Time Out is the best, but they only have them for cities. They're
intended for locals rather than tourists so you avoid the tourist
traps completely and focus on interesting neighborhoods, etc., and you
go to restaurants, nightlife, etc. where locals go.
Rough Guides are always very good. They're honest about positives and
negatives of places, and they always have good coverage of interesting
lesser-known sights and destinations.
Frommers is okay. My main criticism is that they're too focused on
conventional sights and destinations, while Rough Guides is much
better at pointing out hidden gems.
I don't like Lonely Planet because they try too hard to be neutral.
They never say anything negative, so every single place is
"spectacular" or "Fascinating", and if like 99% of us you have limited
time and money and are wondering what to see and what to skip they're
completely useless. They try to cover every inch of a country or
region rather than just the interesting parts, so they wind up having
skimpy coverage of the places you might actually want to go to.
Let's Go sucks, unless your idea of travel is finding the cheapest
possible rathole to stay in, eating in cafeterias and McDonalds, and
partying with other backpackers rather than actually meeting local
people or experiencing anything in the places you visit.
Fodors is the opposite of Let's Go and Lonely Planet - how to do
Europe on $250 a day and not have any fun or do anything off the
tourist trail.
Larry
sightseeing information and reliable hotel and restaurant suggestions). For
driving, Michelin Green and Red guides are best, I think.
Larry at Morro Bay, California (seaotter 6 at a o l dot c o m)(no spaces in
address)
randee
up between Frommer's/Fodor's/Steve's. The Rick Steve's guides seem
particularly helpful with 'how to get around' information. None of the
rest seem worth bothering about. For maps, the Michelin 9nn series are
far better than the 7nn series since they include the rail lines. The
Kummerly and Frey maps and Touring Club of Italy maps are also good, but
the TCI maps seem to be rather hard to find locally in the US.
--
wf.
randee
Planet now). However I have not seen the tv series in a while, nor do I
recall seeing their guides the last time I browsed the travel section at
the local bookstore - are they still published?
--
wf.
--
wf.
Wayne Flowers
Randee Greenwald
ran...@zianet.com
szozu
"gtuo" <gtu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:68708049.04061...@posting.google.com...
> Any thoughts on which travel guide series is your favorite, i have
> tried many and i find that i like the following in this order:
> Thoughts?
I generally use Rough Guide and Lonely Planet. I find Time Out of limited
usefulness.
For looking at BEFORE the trip, I really like the Insight Guides because of
all the beautiful colour photographs. These guides can really help you get
acquainted with a country and aid you in deciding which places to visit, but
they're very heavy and should be left at home.
Lana
erilar
gtu...@hotmail.com (gtuo) wrote:
My number one choice is always Baekecker.
Some of those I've never heard of, but because I'm joining a group
tour(Elderhostel) along the Pyrenees next fall, I looked at quite a few
in search of a fairly specific one that included ALL the places I'll be
going, and the Insight version of SW France was the only one that did.
Lonely Planet, Blue, Frommer, and a couple others did not. If I had been
interested in ALL of France, I'd probably have bought the Baedecker
without even shopping around.
Favorites are ruled by individual preferences as to info included, of
course.
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka Erilar)
You can't reason with someone whose first line of argument
is that reason doesn't count. Isaac Asimov
Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
erilar
at hotmail com> wrote:
> For looking at BEFORE the trip, I really like the Insight Guides because
> of
> all the beautiful colour photographs. These guides can really help you
> get
> acquainted with a country and aid you in deciding which places to visit,
> but
> they're very heavy and should be left at home.
>
That was a comment I forgot to include myself. I don't plan to take the
Insight guide along because of the weight, but then I never take any
guide book along. I copy some relevant pages to put into my trip diary.
erilar
seao...@aol.common.net (Larry) wrote:
> I prefer The Rough Guide series for budget travel anywhere
> (well-researched
> sightseeing information and reliable hotel and restaurant suggestions).
> For
> driving, Michelin Green and Red guides are best, I think.
>
Rough Guide was one of the series I looked at and thought--"but I do
most of that via internet before I leave!!"
Bob Fusillo
Guide books and restaurants
I have not eaten at every restaurant in Venice, so I really can'
t tell you which is the best. There are, however, close to 550 registered
restaurants in Venice, so I do not feel guilty. But lots of popular guide
books are quite willing to tell which are the best. All over Europe - the
world. probably -- people are careening from site to site, from restaurant
to restaurant, from biergarten to biergarten, clutching ( crutching, in many
cases) their Steve's, or Fodor's, or Rough Guide, or whatever, convinced
that the books depict the paths to the gastronomic grail, and that all other
temptations are false. The guide books, in addition, not only recommend, but
tell the reader why they recommend, with descriptions of the food, décor,
prices, and the levels of service.
But I have, in fact, not yet seen a guide-book to Venice - or
Paris or London, towns I know fairly well - that was not out of date the day
it was published. The restaurant business is built on constantly shifting
waters - chefs depart, owners depart, decors depart. But guide books,
although they would not admit it, are rarely updated except superficially -
errors continue from edition to edition. And the better known ones are
quoted in newspapers, magazines, websites, and, of course, the restaurant's
advertising.
Case in point: Trattoria Da Bruno, in Venice, is listed in one
widely used guide-book ( Fodor's), as a " country taverna," grilling its
meat over an open fire, and serving cicheti at the counter. Closed Tuesdays.
That information has long been quoted in one of the world's most widely
influential newspapers, and by more than several Internet tourist and
booking agents. But it hasn't been a "taverna" in years, it no longer grills
its meat in the rustic manner implied, and there is no counter at all. It
is, in fact, a rather sleek, upscale "Ristorante" ( a nomenclature depicting
a level higher than trattoria), with sophisticated Muranese lighting, lovely
china dishes, and a clientele of local bankers, international travelers, and
foodies. And since it signed a contract with Bank Italia to feed its
executives lunch every day, it is no longer closed Tuesdays. The unfortunate
listing cuts two ways - it leads to disappointment by people looking for a
"rustic" and probably inexpensive experience, and it deprives another group
of knowing that Bruno's is no longer what it was and that it is quite worth
investigating.
Ae Oche, the pizza place parroted by everyone as the best in
Venice, has for years served Calzone with still-cool from the fridge
innards, and overdone, dry, and tasteless pizza. And it has gotten away with
it because disappointed tourists don't write guide-books; they merely read
them, flock to the place, and go way disappointed - often assuming that the
best in Venice is none too good.
The places that offer the most pitfalls for the traveler armed
with paper-back guide seem to be those that are praised for their "value,"
which usually suggests that they are inexpensive and good. But no sooner do
many such places get into a guide-book than they are flooded with tourists,
and within a short time - in a some cases a few months -- deteriorate into
truly cheap, often close to offensively slovenly traps. A couple of
oft-listed "budget" places in Paris have gotten so filthy it is scary to sit
in the chairs. But the favorable listings continue, and unaware and trusting
tourists flock to them. For that reason, it is accepted wisdom by many
experienced travelers, to avoid any place that is so listed in a popular
guide book.
But even the big, established, grand old monuments of
restaurants - those that have made it to four-star level in all the
guides -- tend to coast. One of the truths of places that get into the goude
books and cater to the tourist trade is that they almost never see the same
customer twice - last nite's customer is in another country tonight. No need
to worry about repeat business and, as long as the guide books continue to
heap praises, no need to worry about tomorrow's clientele. Da Fiore is
automatically listed and praised from edition to edition ( "Said by many to
be the finest restaurant in Italy," although the names of the "many" and
when they "said" it are never given). As expensive and as hard to get into
as it is, one wonders how often the editors, with their limited budgets and
time, have been back to check on the place. Like a great orchestra, it would
not allow itself to sink below a certain level, but, especially in the
height of the season, it is easy enough to coast along on reputation.
For the traveler, there is no way to be sure. As I said above, I
have not eaten everywhere, so I can't assure you of the best. I could, if
you asked me tomorrow, tell you the places I like, but by the time this gets
in print, that advice might be as out of date as anyone else's. Fodor,
Steves, Rough Guide, et al, are all very good and clear in their
descriptions of popular tourist sites-the paintings in the churches, the
views from the steeples, etc. ( although they are often out of date about
prices and opening times), and are dependable for such purposes, which,
after all, are the real reason for tourism. They are to be commended for
their usually thorough descriptions ( "on the right, in a corner just above
the third altar"), but you are just as well off making a wild and hopeful
guess of your own when it comes to eating between cathedrals.
Tim Kroesen
including wonderful pizza in Venezia... I could observe the food,
service and customer reaction *before* I sat after all...<g>
Tim K
"Bob Fusillo" <rob...@fusillo.org> wrote in message
news:RYYAc.140556$Ly.18723@attbi_s01...
Watcher
> Any thoughts on which travel guide series is your favorite, i have
> tried many and i find that i like the following in this order:
> Thoughts?
>
practical tips -- dealing with currency, language barriers, etc. I
use him for a reference when going to a new place -- his information
is usually current, and his hotel and restaurant recommendations are
usually pretty much on my level of budget and interest.
But I rely more and more on DK Eyewitness Guides. I like to walk
around cities and take photographs, and Eyewitness is ideal for that.
Not so good for finding hotels and restaurants, and somewhat heavy to
carry, but beautifully done, and they make good souvenirs of the trip.
Joan McGalliard
> But I rely more and more on DK Eyewitness Guides. I like to walk
> around cities and take photographs, and Eyewitness is ideal for that.
> Not so good for finding hotels and restaurants, and somewhat heavy to
> carry, but beautifully done, and they make good souvenirs of the trip.
Interesting. I prefer not to use the Eyewitness guide for nearly the
same reason. If I see too many photos of a place I am seeing for the
first time, I tend to see it (and photograph it) through others' eyes.
So I prefer books with enough information to understand what what I am
seeing, and few enough photos to let me see it.
I generally travel with Rough Guides.
joan
--
Joan McGalliard, UK http://www.mcgalliard.org
David
Time Out for Cities.
Rough Guides for other.
Eye Witness Guides for No Imagination.
Baedecker Guides for serious culture vultures.
Lets Go and Lonely Planet for toilet paper.
You did ask :-)
Dave
David
Ever read the Insight Guide to Alsace ? It is written by a group of
cynics whose view on the area is very opinionated tending toward
snobbery. Lots of digs at "this village is a parody of itself" and
kind of thing. The photos are good though.
IMO Guide books should be informative without being a personal crusade
against a certain type of tourist.
Dave
Dave
David
> My number one choice is always Baekecker.
>
there, but its a word that has been devalued somewhat :-)
If you want some "serious" background or information about the
architecture, history provenance of the sites you are seeing, then its
unbeatable. Its a bit dry in places, and tends to be organised in
Alphabetical order. Often comes with a map included in its plastic
cover.
Ironically, they are difficult to find printed in English in
Germany...
erilar
command...@hotmail.com (David) wrote:
Since I never look for English ones in Germany, that's not a problem for
me. The ones I bought in Germany were in German, and in one case where I
also bought the same guide in English for my students, I noticed it had
less information.
They're too heavy to carry around in the pared-down pack load I travel
with, but I do my major planning in advance and just copy the pages I
may need.
erilar
> Baedecker Guides for serious culture vultures.
I guess that describes me, now that I think about it 8-)
The Reids
>> But I rely more and more on DK Eyewitness Guides. I like to walk
>> around cities and take photographs, and Eyewitness is ideal for that.
>> Not so good for finding hotels and restaurants, and somewhat heavy to
>> carry, but beautifully done, and they make good souvenirs of the trip.
>
>Interesting. I prefer not to use the Eyewitness guide for nearly the
>same reason. If I see too many photos of a place I am seeing for the
>first time, I tend to see it (and photograph it) through others' eyes.
I don't find the (often diagrammatic) illustrations an issue for
photography as they are generally of a purely discriptive nature.
However I do find them very good for quickly getting to grips
with a place.
(I wouldn't use any of these guides to choose restaurants, they
change fast and its all too subjective. I ate in Rough Guides
"arguably best restaurant in town" a few days ago, I thought it
"arguably" the worst! Certainly totally outstripped by two others
in immediate area for atmosphere, authenticity[1] and cooking
skill - but not by "The Nags Head") Use your eyes and nose!
1] unless British/Spanish tourist food is the new fusion? I'm not
saying it isn't. This Spanish restaurant featured prawn curry,
smoked salmon on rosti, quesiladas, chilli con carne with potato
skins, chicken with cous cous, duck in ginger sauce and a variety
of other international mixtures. The food was all flavoursome but
the total effect was overload and the other (Brit) customers had
all left by 11pm so so much for spanish atmosphere! (It did have
the best looking south american waitresses in town though).
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale-Lake district-Thames path-London "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap
B Vaughan
>On 18 Jun 2004 13:40:10 -0700, gtu...@hotmail.com (gtuo) wrote:
>
>>Any thoughts on which travel guide series is your favorite, i have
>>tried many and i find that i like the following in this order:
>>Thoughts?
>
>Rough Guides are always very good. They're honest about positives and
>negatives of places, and they always have good coverage of interesting
>lesser-known sights and destinations.
I haven't found them at all useful for finding lodging. I suspect that
they've never seen some of the places in their guide. They do cover
small towns that you might not find in other guides, but some of my
experiences with such towns has been that their descriptions are very
inaccurate, leading me to believe that they revisit these small towns
very infrequently.
>I don't like Lonely Planet because they try too hard to be neutral.
>They never say anything negative, so every single place is
>"spectacular" or "Fascinating", and if like 99% of us you have limited
>time and money and are wondering what to see and what to skip they're
>completely useless. They try to cover every inch of a country or
>region rather than just the interesting parts, so they wind up having
>skimpy coverage of the places you might actually want to go to.
This is a fair criticism of Lonely Planet. However, I have found their
lodging advice to be pretty good. I found one huge inaccuracy in the
Lonely Planet for Ireland. It could have been a disastrous error, but
fortunately we had plenty of time: they had the wrong location of the
Galway airport and we ended up at a little-used airport for trips to
the Aran Islands and had to drive 40 minutes from there to get to the
right one. My guide is a few years old, so I'd be interested if
someone has this year's Lonely Planet Ireland guide to see if they've
corrected this.
>Let's Go sucks, unless your idea of travel is finding the cheapest
>possible rathole to stay in, eating in cafeterias and McDonalds, and
>partying with other backpackers rather than actually meeting local
>people or experiencing anything in the places you visit.
I have always got excellent advice from Let's Go for lodging. On my
recent trip to Ireland, they came through for finding a B&B in Dublin
when all those recommended by Lonely Planet were full. (To be honest,
I didn't try the ones which were actually out of town.) The place
recommended by Let's Go was a decent B&B whose clientele were not
backpackers for the most part.
Your criticism of Let's Go is an often repeated one, and I suspect
that those who repeat it have never put it to the test. Let's Go is
not the best guide for seeing the sights and it doesn't do a great job
of covering out-of-the-way places. It's also not appropriate for those
who want luxury, but for low-cost lodging it can't be beat.
-----------
Barbara Vaughan
My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it
I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup
B Vaughan
>I prefer Baedeker and Michelin (in that order). After that it is a toss
>up between Frommer's/Fodor's/Steve's. The Rick Steve's guides seem
>particularly helpful with 'how to get around' information. None of the
>rest seem worth bothering about. For maps, the Michelin 9nn series are
>far better than the 7nn series since they include the rail lines. The
>Kummerly and Frey maps and Touring Club of Italy maps are also good, but
>the TCI maps seem to be rather hard to find locally in the US.
Michelin has excellent road maps of Italy, and these are easier to
find in the US. I have the Michelin map of central Italy (where I
live) and I actually prefer it to the TCI map. It's easier to read, as
the choice of colors is really good.
B Vaughan
<don...@fell-walker.co.uk> wrote:
> ... I ate in Rough Guides
>"arguably best restaurant in town" a few days ago, I thought it
>"arguably" the worst! Certainly totally outstripped by two others
>in immediate area for atmosphere, authenticity[1] and cooking
>skill - but not by "The Nags Head") Use your eyes and nose!
I stayed in some of their "arguably the best" lodgings in Spain and
had the same reaction. Also, although I had the latest edition, a
suspiciously high proportion of the restaurants they recommended were
no longer in business.
One guide that hasn't been mentioned that was very reliable on the
Spain trip was the Guide Routard. It's a French guide, but I had the
Italian language version. I don't know if it's available in English.
devil
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 22:01:12 -0600, randee <ran...@zianet.com> wrote:
>
>>I prefer Baedeker and Michelin (in that order). After that it is a toss
>>up between Frommer's/Fodor's/Steve's. The Rick Steve's guides seem
>>particularly helpful with 'how to get around' information. None of the
>>rest seem worth bothering about. For maps, the Michelin 9nn series are
>>far better than the 7nn series since they include the rail lines. The
>>Kummerly and Frey maps and Touring Club of Italy maps are also good, but
>>the TCI maps seem to be rather hard to find locally in the US.
>
> Michelin has excellent road maps of Italy, and these are easier to
> find in the US. I have the Michelin map of central Italy (where I
> live) and I actually prefer it to the TCI map. It's easier to read, as
> the choice of colors is really good.
I think I have the same. 1/400,000. I wish they would have 1/200,000 or
better as they do for France.
Talking about which, too bad they discontinued the 200 series in profit of
the 300 ones. Now you have to carry a huge pile of maps and keep flipping
from one to another all the time. Oh well.
Todd
I've used several of these "brands" in different parts of the world.
Here are a few impressions:
LONELY PLANET: Preferred in Asia, but less a front runner in other
parts of the world. Pros: Detailed. Small but generally accurate
maps which have been all I've used in certain locations. Cons:
Sometimes too budget-centric, and there is the occasional titanic
blunder in accuracy that could leave you in front of an empty lot
instead of a hostel. Still, probably my first choice.
ROUGH GUIDES: Sometimes a little too "cheeky" for my tastes (they're
written by young Brits), and they seem somewhat phobic about providing
actual costs, opting instead for general pricing categories like
"expensive", "moderate", "cheap", etc.
FROMMER'S: Not really for the budget traveler, but can be useful for
the mid-range classes.
LET'S GO: Written by college students for college students. If
you're a college student (or just want to bunk with them wherever you
travel), then go for it.
RICK STEVES: Haven't used the country-specific guides, but the
flagship publication ("Europe Through the Back Door") is, in my
opinion, the best general travel primer anyone could read.
Finally, a word of general advice: Often the best guide is the MOST
RECENTLY UPDATED guide - always check the year of the latest update on
the backside of the title page, and factor in that the info was
probably gathered at least six months to a year PRIOR to the date of
publication.
Enjoy,
Todd
www.wonderninja.com
Buy and Sell YOUR Personalized Services!
Bob Fusillo
> Finally, a word of general advice: Often the best guide is the MOST
> RECENTLY UPDATED guide - always check the year of the latest update on
> the backside of the title page, and factor in that the info was
> probably gathered at least six months to a year PRIOR to the date of
> publication.
Noting, of course, that no guide book can afford to really update, even
moderately. Hundreds of places listed, and almost invariably one person,
with a very small budget, to "update." A typical advance is three or four
thousand dollars; how many hotels and restaurants do you think a writer,
after airfare and sleeping, can really check out? MUCH info is carried over
from edition to edition in all of them -- and they get more and more
unreliable for hotels and restaurants. If, and a very big if, people write
in and make comments, the material sometimes -- and a very big sometimes --
gets in new editions.
For the big places -- Rome, London, Paris, Venice etc, a good
old-fashioned book that covers the sites is the best bet. For eating and
sleeping, it is guesswork and luck -- internet "reviews" most usually have
an ax to grind. The best guide to Venice sites, for example, is still the
forty year old "Companion" by Hugh Honour -- thorough to the point of
exhaustion, but the insides of churches and museums have changed almost not
at all since he wrote the book. But his restaurants and hotels -- he lists
them -- his publisher probably insisted -- are meaningless now. But so, for
that matter are the current "Guides."
Interesting thoughts at
http://www.experienceplus.com/bookreview_guidebooks.html
rjf
Bob Fusillo
"Bob Fusillo" <rob...@fusillo.org> wrote in message
news:qn3Ec.1309$AI.210@attbi_s04...
David Horne
> Your criticism of Let's Go is an often repeated one, and I suspect
> that those who repeat it have never put it to the test. Let's Go is
> not the best guide for seeing the sights and it doesn't do a great job
> of covering out-of-the-way places. It's also not appropriate for those
> who want luxury, but for low-cost lodging it can't be beat.
Let's Go is often pretty good for listing places which are more
expensive than 'dirt-cheap' but still reasonable.
David
--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
B Vaughan
this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
>B Vaughan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Your criticism of Let's Go is an often repeated one, and I suspect
>> that those who repeat it have never put it to the test. Let's Go is
>> not the best guide for seeing the sights and it doesn't do a great job
>> of covering out-of-the-way places. It's also not appropriate for those
>> who want luxury, but for low-cost lodging it can't be beat.
>
>Let's Go is often pretty good for listing places which are more
>expensive than 'dirt-cheap' but still reasonable.
Actually, this was my recent experience in Ireland. I'm preparing a
trip report, which should be ready in a few days.
erilar
transportation info, and sometimes even restaurant ideas.
The things I want a guide for don't change much, so I don't need a new
Baedeckers. Ancient and medieval sites don't require much in the way of
updating 8-)
erilar
<1gg5msf.1ng946fhrnwlgN%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> B Vaughan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> > Your criticism of Let's Go is an often repeated one, and I suspect
> > that those who repeat it have never put it to the test. Let's Go is
> > not the best guide for seeing the sights and it doesn't do a great job
> > of covering out-of-the-way places. It's also not appropriate for those
> > who want luxury, but for low-cost lodging it can't be beat.
>
> Let's Go is often pretty good for listing places which are more
> expensive than 'dirt-cheap' but still reasonable.
>
Youth hostels. You can find them on the Internet.
David Horne
> In article
> <1gg5msf.1ng946fhrnwlgN%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
> this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
>
> > B Vaughan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Your criticism of Let's Go is an often repeated one, and I suspect
> > > that those who repeat it have never put it to the test. Let's Go is
> > > not the best guide for seeing the sights and it doesn't do a great job
> > > of covering out-of-the-way places. It's also not appropriate for those
> > > who want luxury, but for low-cost lodging it can't be beat.
> >
> > Let's Go is often pretty good for listing places which are more
> > expensive than 'dirt-cheap' but still reasonable.
> >
>
> Youth hostels. You can find them on the Internet.
No, that's not what I'm talking about at all.
B Vaughan
<erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
>In article
><1gg5msf.1ng946fhrnwlgN%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
>this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
>
>> B Vaughan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Your criticism of Let's Go is an often repeated one, and I suspect
>> > that those who repeat it have never put it to the test. Let's Go is
>> > not the best guide for seeing the sights and it doesn't do a great job
>> > of covering out-of-the-way places. It's also not appropriate for those
>> > who want luxury, but for low-cost lodging it can't be beat.
>>
>> Let's Go is often pretty good for listing places which are more
>> expensive than 'dirt-cheap' but still reasonable.
>>
>
>Youth hostels. You can find them on the Internet.
I find it very hard to get unbiased information about budget lodging
on the internet. trip.com is pretty good, but it usually doesn't cover
the lower end of the lodging spectrum.
As for youth hostels, I rarely use them. Usually I'm travelling with
my husband and want a double room. Some youth hostels have double
rooms, but they are not usually such a bargain compared to other
lodgings. When I do stay in a youth hostel, I want to be very sure
that it's not one of those raucous party hostels. Let's Go is very
good at giving an idea of the atmosphere in every type of lodging it
covers. On my last trip, I used Lonely Planet and found it pretty
reliable also. However, most of the places it recommended were already
fully booked.
erilar
<1gg7kt8.2w44hj1pkfif6N%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> erilar <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <1gg5msf.1ng946fhrnwlgN%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
> > this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> >
> > > B Vaughan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Your criticism of Let's Go is an often repeated one, and I suspect
> > > > that those who repeat it have never put it to the test. Let's Go is
> > > > not the best guide for seeing the sights and it doesn't do a great
> > > > job
> > > > of covering out-of-the-way places. It's also not appropriate for
> > > > those
> > > > who want luxury, but for low-cost lodging it can't be beat.
> > >
> > > Let's Go is often pretty good for listing places which are more
> > > expensive than 'dirt-cheap' but still reasonable.
> > >
> >
> > Youth hostels. You can find them on the Internet.
>
> No, that's not what I'm talking about at all.
>
> David
But they're cheaper than most hotels, particularly those I'd want to
stay in, and I can find them as well as hotel rooms on the Internet. I
like to know where I'm going to sleep ahead of time now that I'm no
longer young enough to miss a night's sleep.
Al
> tried many and i find that i like the following in this order:
> Thoughts?
>
> Blue Guides (very detailed, but limited cities)
> Lonely Planet
> Footprint
> Moon
> Bradt
> Time Out
> Fodor's
> Frommer's
> Rick Steve's
> Insight
> Baedaker
> Michelin
I like DK Eyewitness.
> I must admit, that some of these at the bottom, I have only used
> sporadically. Also, I am looking for a good guidebook for
> Egypt/Israel. Recs?
These are the first two books I'd get:
<http://us.dk.com/Book/BookFrame/0,1007,,00.html?id=0789497182>
<http://us.dk.com/Book/BookFrame/0,1007,,00.html?id=0789451700>
You can get them cheaper at Amazon.
David Horne
> In article
> <1gg7kt8.2w44hj1pkfif6N%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
> this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
>
> > erilar <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <1gg5msf.1ng946fhrnwlgN%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
> > > this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> > > > Let's Go is often pretty good for listing places which are more
> > > > expensive than 'dirt-cheap' but still reasonable.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Youth hostels. You can find them on the Internet.
> >
> > No, that's not what I'm talking about at all.
>
> But they're cheaper than most hotels, particularly those I'd want to
> stay in, and I can find them as well as hotel rooms on the Internet. I
> like to know where I'm going to sleep ahead of time now that I'm no
> longer young enough to miss a night's sleep.
Except not everyone wants to stay in a youth hostel- I don't- and Let's
Go will usually give good recommendations on hotels which are admittedly
pricier than a hostel, but still very good value.
erilar
<1ggd5ef.1vztpv0fhwsfoN%this_address...@yahoo.co.uk>,
this_address...@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> Except not everyone wants to stay in a youth hostel- I don't- and Let's
> Go will usually give good recommendations on hotels which are admittedly
> pricier than a hostel, but still very good value.
Ah, but so does hrs.de, which I've been using lately. I'm one of those
people who plans WAY ahead, you see. If you're a castle-hunter, youth
hostels in castles are a LOT cheaper than hotels in castles. For
castles without youth hostels, I use hotels 8-)
anonymous
I like the Michelin Green Guides for tourist stuff and Let's Go for
general info.
gtuo wrote:
> Any thoughts on which travel guide series is your favorite, i have
> tried many and i find that i like the following in this order:
> Thoughts?
>
> Access Press ( saul wurman--but limited cities)
> Blue Guides (very detailed, but limited cities)
> Lonely Planet
> Footprint
> Moon
> Bradt
> Time Out
> Fodor's
> Frommer's
> Rick Steve's
> Insight
> Baedaker
> Michelin
>