no, i havent read these books. you'll see my comments were regarding his theories about the amarna tablets and what i think hes calling his 'revised egyptian chronology' which i had recently come across. likely a lot of his theories in these books are related to this revised chronology that pushes conventional dates forward by 3 centuries. i found these suspect and so anything else of his, i would automatically be a bit suspicious of. i am familiar with the shishak-ramses theory too. ive read the other book mentioned above, Bible Unearthed and i certainly would read some of rohl if i got my hands on it.
i do not know enough about all this to say authoritatively what parts of the theories are wrong. i think like most here, i rely on professional opinion a lot. there are so many conflicting theories on ancient archeology, you can find 'experts' to support almost any view you want. so i try my best to determine what i think is most accurate based on how compelling the evidence is and also on how well accepted the ideas are in the professional community.
mox