Comparing Artin with Dummit and Foote' Algebra text I am about to take a course in undergraduate Algebra which is using Artin's Algebra.  I have been studying from it and haven't really appreciated the combination of text and problems (granted, I haven't gone too deep into the text).  
Now, this is the text for the class, so I would expect a nice compliment from the lecture to go along with Artin.  I was thinking about getting Dummit and Foote, which seems to have high praise across the board.  What are the strengths and weaknesses of Dummit and Foote, compared to Artin?  Is there a better text for a class at this level?
EDIT: I really don't want a recommendation for another text, but how does Artin compare to other texts.   
 A: I have and am still frequently using both books and I have to say the main thing they have going is that :


*

*D&F has great exercises.

*Artin is friendlier to the audience.


My usual advice is that one learns from Artin and then does the exercises in D&F, but overall they are both great books. From what people have said to me, D&F is better as a book to have after you already understand the content, for review it is great, but on a first pass it may not be so good. I have heard similar things in that last regard, about the textbook Rudin's principles of mathematical analysis (just for comparison if you have read it).
A: Dummit and Foote has a more standard format, and covers a wider variety of topics, but it's extremely dry (and feels very "text-booky" to me).  I didn't like it much.  Take a look at Vinberg instead.  Takes a very similar approach to Artin, but it's more readable in my opinion and has a more manageable number of problems (which are embedded in the section, so you're forced to solve them as you go along).  I find the massive number of exercises in Artin a bit discouraging.  
