This guidebook has the format of one of the Lonely Planet or Rough Guides that covers an entire continent; it has good breadth of information, but the depth, or detail of coverage of any one location is relatively shallow. That makes it a good starting point, but once you decide on an itinerary, you will have to supplement it with more specific material. I also agree with other reviewers that while the coverage of the major cities is decent, the coverage of smaller towns, even when they are some of the most visited tourist attractions in the state, is disappointing.
After using this guidebook on a trip to Fort Davis area and Big Bend National Park last month, I reevaluated my review of this book, and found I needed to also discuss this book's coverage of this location. As other reviewers have mentioned, this book is likely most useful to the traveler from outside of Texas. Texans will find its focus on the larger cities less helpful, and will want more information on smaller towns and rural areas, for which other regionally published guides are simply better. So since this guide's best bet for a target audience is people from outside Texas, it should focus on destinations people might travel to Texas from the US and internationally for. One of these would be Big Bend National Park, one of Texas's two national parks, and the biggest draw, especially for out-of-staters. While the author SEEMS to understand the importance of Big Bend based on formatting, the amount of information he provided on visiting the park was fairly superficial, there is plenty of easily available information on the internet about Big Bend, most of which provided better, more indepth, more helpful information on visiting the park than this book does. I wonder if the section on Big Bend was even written by someone who had been there, as it could have been written based on reading secondary sources.
Also, the author has a very obvious bias that casts doubt on his credibility, making me wonder what less obvious biases I'm just not noticing. The introduction to his section on Houston is a blatant hatchet job on the city. He starts off by saying that although Houston is touted as the largest city in the state, really, if you judge by this other method that he assures you is more accurate, the Dallas-Fort Worth area would be larger. If he had put this factoid in the Dallas section, he might have been able to get away with claiming he was just trying to show that Dallas is still very comparable to Houston even if it does not rank as large, however as it stands, it comes off as snarky sour grapes, a product of the silly and ubiquitous rivalry between these two very nice cities.
His snarkiness continues when he says "Houston vies with Amarillo for worst weather among the large Texas cities." Not only is this not an objective statement, it is not even subjectively defensible. Houston does have fairly oppressive humidity in the summer, but it makes up for it with mild, pleasant winters. Amarillo on the other hand, along with North Texas including Dallas, has dry, scorching summers where every patch of grass that doesn't have a sprinkler turns brown (and the actual temperature gets higher because it isnt tempered by the Gulf like Houston is) and in winter, frigid blasts sweep down the Great Plains unobstructed and ice storms are common, and again the grass turns brown and the trees lose all their leaves, while Houston stays green all year due to its abundant moisture and mild winters. Amarillo and Dallas are in Tornado Alley, and are frequently threatened by these storms with little warning, and also very damaging hail storms are common in this part of the state. These weather problems are far less common in Houston area. Hurricanes and tropical storms, which Dallasites like to talk about as Houston's big weather problem, have only been significant events in Houston three times in the last 30 years. Plus, you have plenty of warning to hunker down or evacuate when they do come, unlike tornadoes.
Houston and Dallas are both great cities, the latter being my college town, the former being my current town. They both have their positives and negatives, neither one can be objectively judged "better" than the other, and attempts to disparage one have no place in a travel guidebook.