Photography RAW format is it better?

Well the simple answer is yes.  Theres a lot of debate about whether raw is better than jpeg, well the answers fairly simply yes, for a start it's 16 bit (or what passes for 16 bit in photoshop ) where jpeg is 8 bit, that means a lot more processing can be done before the image starts to break down, and it gives smoother gradients in the sky etc. 
But by far the biggest benefit if the more highlight/shadow detail they hold.  I did a simple test, I shot the reflections (highlights) on my car deliberately over exposed until the highlight clipping warning came on the camera. Next in photoshops camera raw I opened the jpeg and the raw file  (photoshop camera raw supports jpeg and tiff) then I edited the pics and tried to pull back the brightest highlights, in the jpeg file there was still a blown area, while the raw still had all the detail in the highlight to be pulled back.
From my test I 'd say theres about a good stop maybe a stop and half extra detail in the highlights in the raw thats simply lost in the jpeg.
 No big deal you say, well if your shooting weddings and want the detail in the dress in bright sun I'd go with raw every time.
Remember though that raw does need to be processed through photoshop or the software that came with your camera, while jpeg has the advantage of being quick (and to be fair good enough for non critical work) but if your after big prints or in tricky lighting raw may be your friend.  Personally I tend to shoot both, I have the jpegs for a quick preview and for web use and the raw for more critical use.