From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!reality.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!loke.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: New edition of John Barnes' classic book
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 14:44:53 -0500
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <lp4brm$vg5$1@loke.gir.dk>
References: <lnvk4q$b7q$1@dont-email.me>
 <53a55250$0$25880$862e30e2@ngroups.net>
 <1580045799425385628.134656laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
 <lp1v6v$ibj$1@loke.gir.dk> <lp308d$jrp$1@speranza.aioe.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net
X-Trace: loke.gir.dk 1404416694 32261 69.95.181.76 (3 Jul 2014 19:44:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 19:44:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:187349
Date: 2014-07-03T14:44:53-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> wrote in message 
news:lp308d$jrp$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 7/2/2014 4:56 PM, Randy Brukardt wrote:
>
>>
>> Seriously, it is VERY heavy - I don't recall many books that heavy. (I 
>> just
>> picked it up again and it still feels like a pair of bricks -- I hope the
>> bookshelf is strong enough to hold it. :-) Next time I read it, it will 
>> have
>> to be at a desk.
>
> The 2005 version was 848 pages weight 1.4 kg. The 2012 version
> is 967 pages, weight: 2.02kg. The difference in number of pages
> is not linear with the difference in weight. They must have used
> heavier paper in the 2012 version.

John had to change publishers, so I would guess that their specifications 
are different. Usually I would be in favor of heavier paper (it usually 
lasts longer), but not to the point of making the book heavier than 
free-weights. :-)

                                    Randy.