Slashdot Mirror
CompTIA Adds Linux+ Certification
11 platter hard driv writes: "CompTIA (the Computing Technology Industry Association), the people who made the A+ and I-NET+ certifications, have made a Linux certification. I just received an e-mail a day or two ago that the test is out of beta. This seems pretty important seeing how CompTIA is non-vendor specific." Legions of PHBs and Kinko's nationwide look forward to the resulting resume changes.
So it's vender neutral. So that means it's only about the kernel because linux is not an OS. It's just the kernel. The OS can be anything. Maybe it should be renamed gnu/linux+. Does it cover PDA versions of "linux" or any of the numerous other implimentations of "linux" ? If it's truly vender specific then it is only about the kernel because everything else around it is chosen by the vender. "linux" is not like Windows. So, now that we've decided it's only about the kernel, what kind of kernel is it about? There are many branches of the linux kernel being developed concurrently for different purposes. So lets assume they mean linus' branch. What exactly would someone with 6 months experience know about the kernel and how it works? More importantly, what job would require this certification of 6 month kernel knowledge? I know I'd want someone with a hell of a lot more experience with the kernel than 6 months if the job required that person to work on the kernel.
No this is not a case of symantics. When you say linux we're used to thinking about the distributions of debian, redhat, suse, slackware. But that is not linux. Linux is a kernel that can be used on any number of different operating system environments and it is on embedded systems and what not. A certification of "linux+" is misleading to any employer if any employer was stupid enough to rely on such a thing. If you're going to certify someone for an operating system, narrow it down to the damn operating system. A vender neutral gnu/linux+ is what they're talking about. That's not the same as embedded linux experience or experience with linux with any other environment.
change the certification to gnu/linux+ certification and it kind of makes sense and is useable. But trying to certify on all linux-based OS's by just having linux+ certification is not only impossible but totally useless.
Also, why dont they have WindowsNT+ or any other OS certifications? those are much more static and set in their specifications of what comprises the OS.
Actually, by doing exactly that, you're more qualified than many. I'd much rather have one of my system admins be able to admit they don't know how to do something, know where to look to learn, and then have the overall computing background to understand an implement the steps of a HOWTO, etc. Heck, even the best system admin doesn't know everything. Most tend to specialize in certain areas (filesystems, I/O, Raid/LVM, applications, etc) By that I mean they REALLY understand how to setup certain types of things, but in other areas they need to look stuff up. I've been administering systems for years - and you still hit situations where you have to research some stuff.
Sysadmins, no matter how good, don't know how to do everything off the top of their head. THose that think they do are dangerous because you risk having them screw up something major. A good sys admin is one who is savvy enough to be dropped in front of a system they have never used before and using their overall computing experieince and available reference material - figure out how to set it up or enable some feature while at the same time knowing their limits and knowing if they are treading in an area of the system where they can do real damage - at that point someone who takes the time to research what their about to do online or by asking for help is much better than the person who just lows ahead and screws up.
So gon't sell yourself short. If you think passing a test would qualify you to deploy stuff on a network securely, you're dangerous. A good sysadmin may knwo how to deploy a system in a fairly secure manner, but a great sysadmin will know how to test for anything he/she missed and know where to look to make sure they didn't miss anything.
I've been adminsitering systems since I graduated from college both at work and at home - and I learn something almost ever day. Stuff keep schanging so fast you can't possibly stay current just studying for a test :)
Top Most Bizarre/Disturbing Error Messages
I came up with this one today.. so sorry I posted it elsewhere already.. but..
I liken A+, N+, this new Linux certification, and those like them (MCSE even)... to the PADI Open Water Diver certification.
For those not familiar.. scuba diving is a self-regulated industry. There is generally no law that says you can't dive.. but a dive shop won't sell you tanks, or gear, or sell you air if you don't present a certification. They COULD.... but they won't. Wanna go on vacation to go diving? In general, a dive expedition won't take you out if you aren't certified. Oh.. they can make exceptions... but you get the idea.
You study for several hours.. take a few classes, do some practice diving, and then get run through some tests to get your certification.
Now.. NOBODY who takes the PADI Open-Water certification an passes would come out of it thinking 'I AM NOW AN EXPERT DIVER'. And that's the problem... with N+, MCSE, etc.. people come out of them thinking 'I AM NOW AN EXPERT'. That's what bothers us.. isn't it? It's not that they took it because they want to get int ot his business, and come to their new job willing to learn and grow.. it's because they tend to show up thinking 'I'm certified, I know it all.. nya nya'. And of course.. they don't.
And I have to say, the certification is crap. Utter crap. Allow me to elaborate.
I started studying for the exam way back in early 2000. I bought a book (the "For Dummies" book, for chrissakes!) and skimmed through it. For various reasons, I didn't get around to taking the exam until July of this year. By then, the test had changed, including manmy questions about Win2K, third-party processors, and a much greater emphasis on trivia than I had been lead to expect. I had not studied for any of these things.
Furthermore, the things I had spent the most time cramming (IRQs and DMAs, mainly) were not on the exam. At all.
So I'm sitting there at the test machine, slowly realizing two things. One, I have never seen any of thses questions before in my life. And two, it doesn't matter, anyone with a bit of experience (NOT six months as a computer tech, much less) could answer these questions. I can't remember a specific example, for which I apologize, but even in areas where I had NO experience, I was able to get by by choosing the "least-worst" answer.
I passed the exam, and that is meaningless. I freely admit, as a tech I am very green. At my summer tech job, my boss had to correct me after I put an IDE cable in a hard drive with the red stripe facing AWAY from the power connector! That's a pretty basic mistake, and one you wouldn't expect a "professional, experienced computer technician" to make. But at the time, I had a card in my pocket saying I was exactly that!
My point? I cannot speak for any of the other CompTIA exams - maybe they are incisive and highly effective tools of tester skill that only the best of the best can pass, tests that lay one's ignorance open to the blistering light of knowledge - but the A+ exam does not achieve its goal of accurately evaluating the experience and skill of the test-taker. This makes me worry about Linux+. Do we really want a bunch of Linux+ professionals entering the job market, and making Linux look bad?
On a side note, I have successfully used my certification card to impress attractive women. Anyone else find these things useful?
I'm the stranger...posting to
I agree with you 100%. Being a good sys admin is like being a lawyer: you're not taught every laugh in law school, but you are taught how to find and apply the case law that is relevent to case you're working on. Particularly on extremely complex network OSes like UNIX, linux, Win2K, etc... I think it would be damn near impossible to have an encylopedic knowledge of they work and the syntax of every command you may need at one time or another. A good sys admin has the fundamentals down cold, knows how to do the fancier stuff required of him in his job and knows how to get answers to the tough stuff that comes up. It's one thing to know how to run your network as it is today, but a good sys admin will know how to be able to run the network as it will be in the future as the company's needs dictate.
Chris