I disagree with the other answer that it's not the book but the hours you put in - if the book is off-putting and difficult to follow, it will affect your motivation to put in the hours required.
IM John Watson has a fantastic review of Dvoretsky's work which I recommend you read before committing either way.
I must emphasize that this is a terribly advanced work that I don't
think is a very good way for the average player to study the endgame.
The majority of the examples are complex and position-specific, and
neither the average student nor even strong masters will follow or
play over most of the hundreds of positions that are given extensive
analysis, not to mention the subvariations derived from those
positions.
He also contrasts this with Fundamental Chess Endings:
In my own teaching to average players I am still using Mueller and
Lamprecht's Fundamental Chess Endings, which has a wonderful balance
between Encyclopaedic coverage (I can find almost anything), examples
that can be shortened at most points, and clear explanations that
bring together endings of the same sort.
"Get them both!" they say and of course if you are financially so fortunate then you obviously can't go wrong with that, but if you are only going to get one, and are not IM level, I suggest get Fundamental Chess Endings first and then move on to Dvoretsky once you have mastered this (and have appetite for more).
