Skip Navigation

Is Rough Guide kicking Lonely Planet's Ass??

Travel Forums General Talk Is Rough Guide kicking Lonely Planet's Ass??

Page

Last Post

21. Posted by flyingbob (Inactive 842 posts) 6y

I'm not suggesting that you compose a complete guide on Wiki. Just pick out what you want. Bit of ink at £3 a cartridge and a few sheets of paper £2.50 for 500 sheets is hardly breaking the bank either.
Each to their own though, I'm just saying that I do fine without them. I'm not saying having a guide or not is right or wrong. Just giving my opinion.
And as for the quote about dog poop? That's beyond me where it's coming from (the quote that is, not the dog poop).

22. Posted by Seany (Respected Member 268 posts) 6y

If I'm going away on trip for a month plus I would invest in a guide book. While using my guide book during the course my travels, its grows a sentimental value and only when you get back home the book is like a souvenir. I couldn't just give it away, nor swap it at a border crossing.

Personally I like to have a guide book for each trip I take and in turn it becomes a colection of travel guides...

If I was going away, for say a few days on a city break or somthing ,I wouldn't bother with a guide book (I doubt most people do) . However getting plenty of tips on what to do and see from Wikipedia and such is obviously helpful, whether you print the information or not...

23. Posted by Dodger (Inactive 875 posts) 6y

Quoting flyingbob

And as for the quote about dog poop? That's beyond me where it's coming from (the quote that is, not the dog poop).

:) it was a sarcastic analogy of something else equally useless. But maybe over the top. I shouldn't say what you do is useless, but it doesn't make sense to me for the reasons I gave for a long haul.

24. Posted by Dodger (Inactive 875 posts) 6y

Quoting Seany

If I'm going away on trip for a month plus I would invest in a guide book. While using my guide book during the course my travels, its grows a sentimental value and only when you get back home the book is like a souvenir. I couldn't just give it away, nor swap it at a border crossing.

Personally I like to have a guide book for each trip I take and in turn it becomes a colection of travel guides...

Ive been away, what ever away is, for 2 years now, so carrying a bunch of books isn't an option, and since i sold my house, neither is sending it home. I guess if I was heading home after a trip I could see the sentimental value of keeping the book. I've learnt to become a lot less attached to "things" now. Except this thermos, and thats all I need.

25. Posted by Sparkle222 (Budding Member 10 posts) 6y

I prefer Rough Guide but I have noticed that a few of my dream destinations have no RG so it looks like I'll be using Lonely Planet as well =)

26. Posted by flyingbob (Inactive 842 posts) 6y

Quoting Dodger

:) it was a sarcastic analogy of something else equally useless. But maybe over the top. I shouldn't say what you do is useless, but it doesn't make sense to me for the reasons I gave for a long haul.

Obviously you know what you mean, that's all that matters I suppose.
I haven't a clue what you're on about. Still, I guess it's all got something to do with guidebooks somewhere.

27. Posted by lizruizhu (First Time Poster 1 posts) 6y

LP's format is easier to access, with more options for the backpacker budget-wise. Rough Guides tend to be a bit more general with information and prices, but are easier to read (like a story book, compared to LP's directory-like format) with better spacing. I know that sounds a bit anal but when I'm trying to get information I don't want to have to squint like mad.

Both have one thing in common - their maps suck. You can find better maps (by district or province) just by Googling. Having said that, LP's maps tend to have more info, with even minor streets labelled and not just symbols and major road names which really aren't helpful at all when you want to do a walking tour.

Both will appeal to different kinds of travellers, but if you're the type who goes into a panic mode when presented with the myriad options of travel guides, you should browse through each brand's guidebook on your OWN country first.

I picked up the guidebook for my home country - Singapore - a while ago. I don't know if they've released a new edition yet, but according to Lonely Planet, "SM" stands for Special Minister when it actually stands for Senior Minister. This is one mistake I'm pointing out, but I felt that for a brand which devotes a good many pages for history and cultural introductions (compared to most other guidebooks out there) this was a bad, basic mistake to make.

I've read a few forums on this LP vs RG topic and have to agree with some posters that LP's description of a country or place can be "too" personal (read: prejudiced). This is even more pronounced with the guides for Asian countries, where pretty much every Asian country is "less developed than the West". The real problem is that tone is carried throughout the guidebook.

Perhaps that's why they didn't get Americans to write the Vietnam guidebook. What a ball that might be, to read their take in the history chapter.

28. Posted by flyingbob (Inactive 842 posts) 6y

Quoting lizruizhu

LP's format is easier to access, with more options for the backpacker budget-wise. Rough Guides tend to be a bit more general with information and prices, but are easier to read (like a story book, compared to LP's directory-like format) with better spacing. I know that sounds a bit anal but when I'm trying to get information I don't want to have to squint like mad.

Both have one thing in common - their maps suck.

All far too expensive - and I'm totally in agreement, their maps are pretty naff.
A little pocket book printed locally, by the locals, for about €2 or €3 tops does me - same as little 30 page phrase books.

29. Posted by Seany (Respected Member 268 posts) 6y

That was a very informative post you added Lizruizhu. I wasn't smart enough to think of comparing guide books of my own country though. So simple but effective...

Post 30 was removed by a moderator