Slashdot Mirror
IT Certifications Summary
A reader writes: "Icrontic.com has a new article up called 'All You Need To know About IT Certifications.' It talks about several of the major Microsoft certifications, and of course, a few of the Linux certs, including Linux+ and RHCE. "
They should have called this "System Administration and Network Administration Certifications" not "IT Certifications". How could they leave out Oracle certs, Java certs, security certs, etc.
Hey, I'm 16. Hypothetically speaking, would anybody give someone my age a job if they had some certs? I mean not like a bench-tech at CompUSA for your A+, but like a Novell admin (or even like an apprentice) with a Network+, CNA, CNE, and CISSP (and of course experience). If I could scrounge up the money, I could pass the A+, Network+, CNE, CNA, MCP, and (with a little studying) CISSP. I have experience to back it up, so don't whip the "no experience" card out on me. So all it boils down to is: should I get some certs and look for an IT job, or not waste my time (and money) and just get a normal teenager job?
I belong to the ______ generation.
You need both...the certification to get the job, and the experience to keep it.
When I started working in IT support, despite having MS' "defacto standard" MCSE certification, I didn't know shit. Took 6 months to a year before I was actually useful. Today, I'm pretty much platform neutral and choose to base my recommendations on what the client needs and not what MS says will work (they are often wrong). I still have all the MS books and have hardly touched 'em after passing the exams. I prefer to find answers on the 'net that have been posted by people that actually have real-world solutions, not just what the book says.
You're using her as bait, Master!
Eight years ago I started out as a UNIX administrator by reading "Essential System administration" and then getting an entry level job making not much money. From their I started reading "DNS & Bind", "sendmail", etc, etc. Now I am a Sr. Unix Administrator (with a book shelf full of Oreily books). A few years ago I wanted to get into databases, so I read Oracle beginners guide and then the DBA handbook. I started doing DBA tasks and my company sent me to a backup and recovery class to get up to speed on it quickly. I have no certifications, nor do I have the desire to pursue them.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if one really wants to get into IT they have to enjoy it to the point that they feel motivated to learn new things on their own. Too many people just equate certification to salary.
-- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
on the tests you have to keep in mind how things should work
No - you have to keep in mind how MS thinks you should work them. A lot of questions are "What is the best way of...." when best depends a lot on some specific details of the infrastructure.
The classic (and annoying) question like this is "When somebody leaves a company what should you do with their account? Which of the following is the best answer.". The answer (according to MS) was disable them, and delete the account after 2 weeks. Huh?? This is simply barking - it may be the best for some cases, but if you are working for the security services I cannot see them thinking that this was the best policy.
The questions have got slightly more sane recently, but so much of the MCP exams is trying to learn the MS mindset so you can work out their view of best.
I'm studying for my MCSE right now, and I whizzed through the practice questions on the Windows 2000 Professional (workstation) part last night. One of the questions in particular caught my eye. It said (paraphrased):
"Which of these two operating systems [Windows 2000 Professional | Windows 2000 Server] can you run a public web server on?"
Well, of course, I picked both. I'm running Apache on Windows 2000 Pro right now, and IIS also comes as an optional add-on. When I looked up my answer, I was surprised to find that I was wrong. Then I remembered that I wasn't wrong because of the technical capabilities of the OS, but because of the licensing agreement, which states that you can only connect 5 computers to a Pro OS at any one time for file sharing and "Internet Information Services".
It's a different mindset. Being used to Linux servers, I assumed that the only thing limiting me from running what I wanted was hardware. However, to pass the MCSE, you not only have to know the technical features of the OS, but also what Microsoft wants you to do with it.
BTW, if you think the MCSE is easy, try taking it yourself. I've been doing Linux and Windows system administration for years, and this stuff still isn't coming naturally to me. It's also good experience for anyone adminning Windows boxes, as you will definitely know how to set up disk images and domain controllers once you are done with it. If you think Windows Update is the best way to maintain your set of 5+ Windows PCs, definitely take it, or at least read the study guides. It might make your job a lot easier.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
I now have a great job, doing the stuff I know and love, and was actually sent to school by the new company to learn the tools I'll be using 'proper' (I didn't bother getting certified, however)
Maybe some day I will get a CISSP, but certifications on products are a stupid thing IMNSHO. A certification should be more general, demonstrating you know something about a piece of the industry, not that you know how to do it with product X.
You don't go to college to get an advanced degree in 'using matlab' You go to become an engineer.
How can this article ignore two of the most important certifications on the market right now, LPI and cSAGE??
They're both platform-independent, they're both psychometrically valid, and they're both of paramount importance to anyone looking to run computer infrastructures that include *nix systems.
cSAGE is an entry-level exam designed to certify competence in the practice of systems administration, and it was developed by the community, just like LPI (in cSAGE's case, it was developed by the community of systems administrators and the folks at USENIX and SAGE - The Systems Administrators Guild.
Isn't everyone tired of taking exams designed to test your ability to memorize trivia about a vendor's products? Why would you want yet another certification just because vendor $FOO has cranked out a new version of their widget? Wouldn't you rather have certifications that are designed to qualify your ability to do your job, rather than your ability to memorize?
That's exactly what cSAGE is all about.
.@.
unless you prove to me that you are a professional in your field. MCSE, et all, means nothing to me when hiring you. I've simply seen too many newly minted "systems engineers" from third rate night schools that exist only to "teach the test".
These poor folks have no practical knowledge, no understanding of the way systems actually work, etc, etc.
I know this is harsh, but I have the HR screeners send any resumes highlighting certifications rather than work experience right to the folks who hire for the help desk.
I know this is far out, but I believe IT should be treated as a profession, and having vendors hand out certifications on thier products no more makes an engineer than learning how to operate X-ray equipent makes one a radiologist.
I just started teaching night classes for a local training company. On consecutive nights I teach a class in A+ (PC Hardware), Network+, Server+, 2000 Pro and 2000 Server. Nominally I work as an independent consultant, but that's not going so well right now.
Most of my students are out of work Steelworkers. Almost all of them cite their desire to find a stable career as their reason for seeking certification.
What's sad is, if I had a stable career, I would never be teaching these people - none of whom really have the requisite experience that should go along with any cert (3 - 6 months for A+, one to two years for the others). I can't tell them that. At $2000 per class, how could I?!?
One of the most surprising things about IT certs is the numbers. Since the A+ certiification started in the mid-80s, there have been 260,000 people certified (Comptia certs are for life). Microsoft, which decided that those who obtained NT4 MCSE are still MCSEs after originally stated they wouldn't be starting this year, says there are 470,000 people with the MCSE cert.
There is a lot more need in the world for competent techs than there is for folks who are marginally qualified to work on high-level business systems. There is a lot more need for competent people than there is for certifications.
I tell my students that certification does not mean they're ready for the high-paying jobs they all hear about. I tell them that certifications represent a minimal standard for competency, and that the best thing they can do - whether they get certified or not - is to learn the lessons I teach, not the answers to the questions on the tests.
As a trainer, a certified IT professional, and a genuinely clueful computer guy, it's a lesson I only hope they (and anyone who reads this) take to heart.
-- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
It is important to note that basically all of these exams are product certifications. Having an MCSD certifies that you are familiar with the Microsoft development environment but it does NOT certify that you know much about software engineering. Certainly, Microsoft tries to ensure that you actually know how to program but they don't do a very good job; that's not a dig at Microsoft, though, as they are primarily ensuring that you know their tools.
Now, some companies will hire you if you have sufficient product certifications. Others require a degree from a recognised institution. At the place where I work, we are of the latter mindset. Someone who applies to our company and just lists Microsoft certifications will have their resume instantly trashed. Someone who has a BSc in Computing Science will be seriously considered. Depending on what we want them for, a BSc and an MCSD _may_ carry more weight than a BSc alone. It certainly shows that someone is dedicated to their field. But the important thing to note is that an MCSD by itself adds NO VALUE WHATSOEVER to a potential employee unless they have a legitimate degree as well. Of course, this is just the current place I am employed.
Prior to my current employment, I worked at a company which was huge on Microsoft certifications. They most definitely would hire a developer who only had an MCSD and treated such certifications as more valuable than BSc's. That said, the company is now in dire straights and the average developer there was of far lower calibre.
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
GIAC is certainly is a good deal of work. The practical requires a good week or more of effort to complete in terms of research and writing. GIAC has posted the practicals of those who have completed the cert to get some idea of what they require. I know of at least 3 other people who tried for the cert at the same time I did but didn't complete the work successfully. Partly because unlike other certs there is a timelimit of about 3 months to complete everything.
They've also stated that their goal is not to have a deluge of people with the cert(unlike Cisco, MS, Novell, etc. who advertise how many are certified). If they start seeing a lot of people passing the cert, they'll make the cert harder to obtain. Worth pursuing, definately.
sheldon - GCWN #168
However, I should note that they both have college degrees (BS in CS). If you want to be a developer, most companies that I've dealt with are degree snobs. If you are in college now, majoring in CS or EE (or even other disciplines), there should be internships and co-op positions available to you regardless of experience. If you're looking for a full-time development position, though, it's going to be difficult. You're competing for the same job with people who have college degrees. If you're an HR director, which applicants do you schedule for interviews?
Is it fair? Maybe not. Is that the way it works? Absolutely*. (*YMMV)
-J
There are perhaps thousands of people in the world that have obtained CISSP certification.
If my CISSP number is any indication, there are slightly less than 30,000 worldwide.
There are perhaps a few thousand people in the world who can credibly claim to be expert in the disciplines of computer security. Almost nobody in the latter category is a member of the former.
Is this a case of knowing what one doesn't know? I'm SANS certified and a CISSP. I wouldn't consider myself an "expert" in security. I'd be highly dubious of anyone calling themselves a security expert. I'm certainly "security aware", and strive to make my networks as secure as possible. Thankfully, my external systems have been locked down enough to resist any breaking attempts so far (knocks on wood). Oh yeah, they're Windows servers, too (you anti-MS zealots can STFU, thank you). Am I an expert or just lucky so far? Management says I'm an expert.
I didn't particularly care for the way the CISSP exam was written and administered, but while studying for it, my eyes were opened to a few things I haven't considered before. Before, I was tightly focused on the technical side of securing systems, and hadn't realized that there are operational and administrative security issues to be dealt with. Something good does come from these tests.
Security certification is a bad idea.
Maybe, but it's certainly good for me when it comes time for my reviews, or when I'm looking for new work. That's what it all really boils down to: how many letters you can get behind your name. Management doesn't know which certs are worthless and which might actually mean something. They're also convinced that GIAC, MCSE, CCNA, CISSP, (acronyms ad nauseum) is better than someone who's had 10-15 years hands-on experience. They use it as a hiring tool because it helps them save time.
What about CNA, CNE or any of the other various Novell certifications?
Have these idiots been living under an MS-rock for the past 10 years?
-- Jim