For me it's a bit mixed: I loved a lot the science and a bit less the world-building. But funnily enough, I found that 2 had more science (even though there is a lot of politics)

The science parts of the series are fascinating, especially how close to plausible a lot of the non-medical portions are.

Actually, it's interesting to see that some science things are already more advanced in our current world. For example, I expect that we might be able to see quantum internet for instantaneous discussion whatever the distance whereas they don't have it in the books. (1/2)

Or the nuclear fusion which they achieved only in the third book. Funny how sometimes the real world goes beyond the fiction. It's even more obvious in "Foundation" serie: when they read the DNA, it takes weeks whereas we can do it in a few hours now. (2/2)

Oh I *adore* Asimov's worldbuilding and love the anachronisms in his futurisms. Such as the robots operating a physical control panel to operate the video-phone equivalent; or actually speaking to each other rather than using local-area wireless :D

I didn't read "robots" yet! Stop the spoilers right away! :p

You should get on with that. Some of the Elijah Bailey books are wonderful. I imagine Rammstein in my head while reading them since about 2000 when I spent a lovely summer with those books and rammstein on my mp3 player :D

I'm slowly catching up. I read hyperion recently and the "commonwealth" saga from Peter F. Hamilton (well, a few other books from this same author because it was awesome). But I'm going through the big SF hits!

The Hyperion/Endymion quadrilogy is gloriously good. Did you enjoy it?

Honestly, meh. Definitely not one of my fav series... For me it felt like the serie didn't know if they wanted to go full SF or that they were trying to pull in some mystical stuff and we end up with a lot unexplained, which I didn't appreciate.