Red Hat Takes Heat Over Certification

EdA wrote in to tell us about this piece, where Red Hat takes heat for its certification process. From the article - "I'm no more of a fan of Microsoft than the next person, but I can say that the support we get from Microsoft is superior, and less expensive," Daher said. "Microsoft always comes to our door, they bring demo units, keep us in touch with their engineers, and certification for our people costs only $2000 each, on-site. Red Hat wants $5,000 a person and we have to fly our people to Durham, [N.C.]."

Comments

Prices -Check Again $2,498

[N8F8]

I'm sure the airfare adds to the cost buy this is directly from Red Hat Training info

Price:
The special introductory bundle price for this five-day course is $2,498 ($2099 for the training + $399 for the Certification Lab Exam, £1,599 in the UK).
Duration:
5 days
Training Start Time: 9:00 a.m.
Training End Time: 4:30-5:00PM (depending on class progress)

Training is also available through Global Knowledge.

Against the anti-cert mentality

[BlackHawk]

OK, I usually allow posts like these to roll off the monitor, but not this time. Seems like every time there's a story on certification, the anti-cert contingent rolls out of the woodwork. Fine. Now let's hear from the other side of the aisle.

I'm not employed by any vendor, nor am I employed to teach any vendor's curriculum, although I once was: I still hold CNI certification in addition to the other alphabet soup that I could staple at the end of my .signature file. I say that so that those who want to dismiss my viewpoint simply because I have a certification can do so immediately.

I do contribute occasionally to the LPI project.

I'm surprised to find out that anyone gives a fsck about vendor "certification". I thought everyone had realized it was a meaningless scam by now. A week or two of training isn't going to get you any more knowledge than reading a good book (like an O'Reilly guide) and playing with the system a bit - and an O'Reilly guide is a hell of a lot cheaper.

Let me put this as delicately as I can: you have no idea what you're talking about, if you believe that a person can learn just as much about a system they've not worked with from a book and some play time, as they can from an instructor-led class. Now, I'm not saying that all instructors ran their classes as well as I did (and I have the trust of several companies in this town who continue to ask for me, even though I haven't worked the classroom for over a year), but I can say that if an instructor is worth a damn, and most of us are, then the only way you can use a self-study book to outstrip participation in my class is to ignore me and the curriculum, and sleep in the back row. If you do that, it's your own fault. The concept of certification isn't to blame here. It's shitty implementation on the part of some, not all.

["Our customers ask if we are [certified], and certification gives our business more legitimacy.]
Not with knowledgable customers - or knowledgable potential employees.

Oh, yeah, right. That's why vendor certification programs are so popular among the best and brightest companies and people. They certify because they want to know that all those who are certified have taken exams demonstrating that they all have a certain minimum level of knowledge. Not "competence". The best test in the world won't prevent a well-trained bozo from screwing up your server. Competence isn't just knowledge, it's also judgement, and quite honestly: character. The best people I've worked with knew when to say "I don't know" from behind their multiple certifications. They were the smart ones. But the truth is, companies want to have the ability to say, "OK, our people will know at least as much as a CNE", and be able to learn that about their employees (and potential new-hires) by looking at a certificate. Does that guarantee competence? Of course not! But given all else equal... training, opportunity, experience... I'm more likely to give the nod to a certified engineer, because I know she's proven herself in testing. That isn't the only factor I'd apply, of course, but it carries weight. And I'm knowledgable, thank you.

Stop knocking certification. You want to knock the programs, go ahead. The instructors? Go ahead, but be ready to back yourself up with hard evidence. The companies who use certification as their only criterion? Please, feel free, and I'll join you! But to slam on the idea of certification itself shows lack of understanding, not only in the realm of corporate hiring practices, but in human pshycology as well.

The difference between a MCSE and RHCE

[cyphunk]

I'm a MCSE myself and I've taught MCSE and Networking courses for over a year now. I've looked into taking the RHCE... though it looks great, I don't want to limit myself to a label anymore. But that is not what I wanted to say...

If you look at what the average MCSE learns and knows...
1) Learns what a kernel IS
2) Learns how to work with special GUI's to get done what they need.
3) Learns how to deal with a few special problems which require getting deep into the NOS's settings (the registry)... like I can count them on my finger.
4) You learn about the hardware you can use... and how to INSTALL the drivers.

Linux, is still (at least for now), inherently more difficult and to successfully understand and administer. You have to understand things on a much more detailed level.

1) You learn how to understand the messages that the Kernel spits at you... how to change on the kernel operates
2) You learn the cmd prompt utils needed to get your hands dirty. I don't have a argument for this one... just that everyone I have seen that has a understanding of (and especially those with a fetish for) can comprehend the hidden problems (when it comes to protocols or hardware) a whole lot quicker (less explaining needed).
3) You learn how to RTFM, something a MCSE may never learn...
4) You get into the details of every service and have to understand it at a technical level (because this is how all the documentation is written... I mean, its not just... do x y z, more like... do x because, y because, z because).

my 2c

- cyphunk

Those quoted prices are only partially correct.

[scorpioX]

You should only have to pay $5K if you take all of RedHat's training classes (4 total). And then the price would be pretty much inline with MSCE and CNE training costs.

The actual RedHat certification test (RH302) is $750. If your people are already knowledgeable about UNIX, but not necessarily Linux or RedHat, then the best option is to send them to RH300 which is a week long "rapid track" training class that includes the test. RH300 is $2700.

As far as locations, now that RedHat has partnered with GlobalKnowledge, you should be able to find a training center fairly close to you. See http://am.globalknowledge.com/redhat/index.html for more info.. A quick check at the GK site shows that RH302 is being offered in TX, DC, MN, CA, MA, NJ and CO in the coming months.

BTW, I don't work for RedHat or GlobalKnowledge. It just so happens that I recently went through (and passed) RH300.

My name is Mark, and I'm a RHCE

[Mark F. Komarinski]

Ya, I went through it. Mostly because:

a) I could
b) My boss paid for it
c) I was at Red Hat the day they had their IPO
d) Nice ego boost, having used Linux for 8 years.

Anyway, the certification isn't easy unless you know Linux like the back of your hand. I can't really go into the details of the RHCE exam (hellooo NDA), but I'm pretty sure I can tell you that you *really* need to know what you're doing. It's more than just studying the manual the day before the exam and passing. Most of it isn't RH-specific, so if you knew Debian really well, you could take the week-long course and do just fine.

To be fair, I never took any of the CNE or MCSE exams, so I can't do a good comparison of the two.

Give Red Hat a break.

[etymxris]

The person in the rant said that whoever gets a certification is suddenly very valuable. That would indicate to me that the certification itself is very valuable. Whereas lemming hordes of people have MS certifications, a palsy 1500 have Red Hat certifications. Right now, demand for MS certs is medium, demand for Red Hat certs is high (compared to where they were last year). This would dictate that RedHat certs would cost more since it is harder to get them. This leads to the next point.

Sorry, but Red Hat is just a wee bit smaller than MS. They cannot yet afford to fly people all over the place. They cannot yet afford to have very low prices that come from immense volumes.

This whole rant seems like people who complain mom and pop shops can't compete with Walmart in price or availability. It takes little brainpower to realize why this is the case. But mom and pop shops have other benefits, such as more personalized service, and oftimes better product. So it just seems like a misplaced complaint to say that Red Hat cannot compete with MS in certain ways. They can't. Get over it.