Novell's Certified Linux Engineer
AEnertia writes "Novell have been quick in moving ahead with their recent aquisition of SuSE. I was browsing their site when I found this page describing their new certification (CLE) under their certifications programs. Looks like they are positioning their well respected certification program for their newest asset."
That this certification is worth more than my SCO Master ACE. Cheers,
Step 1. Write code. Step 2. ??? Step 3. Profit!
From the Novell site:
the test
The Novell Practicum test for the Novell Certified Linux Engineer (Novell CLE) will require you to prove your Novell Nterprise Linux Services knowledge in a "real life" setting. Your knowledge of both Linux and Novell Nterprise Linux Services will be tested.
The practicum is basically a remote connection to a live server bank with Linux installed. Using the remote access session, you will be given a scenario with tasks to complete. These tasks will include configuring Novell Services on Linux, performing basic Linux tasks, and may even get into some troubleshooting.
You will need to perform these tasks just as you would in a real environment. You will be evaluated automatically on each of the servers and will you receive a pass or fail exam result. The length of the exam is estimated to be about two hours.
There is no "written" test anticipated at this time.
For once, there is nothing written, and you actually have to demonstrate proficiency! No more "wannabes" (*cough*MCSE*cough*) merley memorising and getting the Certification.
libertarianswag.com
Novell's Certified Linux Engineer
Just one? Might be an uphill battle for Novell then...
The coolest voice ever.
So the first thing that you see when you go to the Novell page is a guy laying on his back, arms cross behind his head.
Are they saying that we are lazy?
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
I was checking the SCO website and came across their "SCO certified IP lawyer" certification webpage.
What do you guys think? Worth getting?
Could-a, should-a, would-a, didn't.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Novell had a Internet track to the CNE years ago, back in the days when Netscape Enterprise Web Server ran on Netware. The classes were horrible and I feel bad for anyone that paid to take them.
It appears from the website that this is just a single 5-day course on Novell Nterprise Services for Linux (Netware File and Print and Directory Services running on Linux), not a course on SuSE or Ximian. They suggest (but do not require) that you get a LPI certification first before taking the class.
It's kind of a stretch that they are calling this a Certified Linux Engineer, since there is no actual Linux training involved, just training on Novell's product running on Linux. In fact, the course material says that you should know Linux before taking the course.
So, unfortunately this seems like yet another empty certification, and shame on Novell for calling someone a Certified Linux Engineer when all they did was take a 5-day course on one of Novell's Linux products.
- "When you want something with all your heart, the entire universe conspires to give it to you" -Paulo Coelho
Okay, for all (three) of you who don't already know Linux, and who aren't interested in the "Novell" portions of this class, I'll be teaching GNU/Linux for the bargain price of (oh, it pains be to quote a figure so high) only $1,000 for a five day course!
Step right up!
If you're a bright class we might even get to advanced topics such as systems administration or software development with GCC and vi!
I went to a real engineering school to learn Computer Engineering (a 4 year EEE + CS program), and every time I see a company create a certification program that takes less than a month to become an "engineer", well... it makes me cringe. I know in other parts of the world that it's not legal to abuse terminology like that, and wish the US would adopt some similar standards. This dilutes the prestige associated with earning an actual engineering degree (really, there is some!).
I know the difference between a real engineer and a fake one, but I'm not so sure the average guy on the street understands the distinction. I also suspect people in hiring positions give a lot more weight to a certification that pretends to be an engineering degree than they really should.
Can't Slashdot think up any new jokes? Of course not.
... so only the "/her" part was new)
OK, here's something new...
Q. Why did the MSCE cross the road?
A. Someone told him/her to.
Q. Why did the Certified Linux Eng. cross the road?
A. Someone told him/her not to.
(ok
All sigs should be as funny as possible, but no funnier.
Oh great. Another reason for non-engineers to call themselves engineers.
Its a poor craftsman who blames his tools.
Its an even poorer craftsman who cant tell a good tool from a bad one.
Anything NOT worth doing is NOT worth doing well...
The Novell page doesnt seem to reference how long the cert is good for - even in the faq..
Anyone know?
GPL'd web-based tradewars themed space game
This has been available for at least 6 months now. Sleep well.
open (SIG, "</dev/zero"); $sig = <SIG>; close SIG;
Novell mentioned it was comming in '02 and announced it at Brain Share '03.
The only reason to have a certification is to be able to prove to someone who doesn't have a clue about computers that you might know what you're doing, ie: it's something to flash the HR lepton who has concocted a bunch of hiring "qualifications" that they themselves don't understand. I've held an MCSE for nearly 5 years now and I still have yet to be asked to produce it. I'm just glad somebody else paid for it. A certification is no replacement for the problem solving skills that only experience can teach you, but try telling that to some HR drone. That's one of the reasons I decided to go the self-employed route. For some weird reason, it's a hell of a lot easier to bid a support contract for a company than it is to get hired by them, even though you may be doing the exact same thing for more money!
You're using her as bait, Master!
I think most *nix people, like myself, are turned off to MS not simply because their servers are less stable or more bug prone, god knows that *nix admins have to run patches a lot too. I think my biggest gripe has to be the cumbersome nature of admining a box with a UI that was really designed for a user-friendly home machine. Compared to linux or solaris, where I can admin a hundred boxes by typing in one command (of course, after I set everything up to do that), its a bitch to admin multiple windows machines. On linux desktops, if i want to set up printers, i simply copy over the cups config files to the new machine. 1 second, done. Windows, you must go through a myriad of printer configuration screens, esp. if your printer is on an lpd server. I could ghost a windows image and burn it in to each machine, preserving settings, but that is as well, time consuming. I could copy out the registry settings and reimport them at install, but its still easier to scp/rcp files and be done with it. Now a good MCSE is a master at his/her craft and I admire his/her patience (hehe) and his/her ability to navigate and troubleshoot a poorly documented and closed source system. However, I do agree with the parent/parent/parent/.. that the MCSE test is quite lacking. Real-world scenarios in a lab and not on a A-B-C-D answer sheet would make the MCSE test more worthy of the money that you put into it.
Its also quite easy for people to make fun of things they dont understand; I love how people always say MS stuff is simplistic, until they need to fix it. Then they just say its poorly designed. Maybe if they spent time trying to understand how the OS or application does things, instead of complaining about it, they could fix it.
Actually that's not my problem with Windows. My problem is that it's too complex, too convoluted, and simply lacks the tools to properly diagnose and repair. Sure you can buy third party tools to make up for some of these deficiencies but I'd rather use Linux. The configuration for pretty much everything is plain text and documented freely instead of hidden behind a single-point-of-failure binary registry and anonymous GID identifiers. The system internals are all public and I can access any part of it I need without gagging NDAs and/or paying for the privilege and finally -- I am not tied to one megacorp with a penchant for monopolistic practises and stifling innovation. I have enough problems with running a business that I don't need to compound the issue by welcoming the vampire into my house.
Basically my beef with Windows and my desire to use Linux stems from the simple fact that when something does go wrong, I can fix it far easier and without paying for the privilege. And in those cases when Microsoft is either unwilling or unable to fix something, I can always hire a programmer to fix it for me.
I suggest that any good technically competent person is lazy, and someone I'd rather hire. Put yourself in a supervisory role for a moment. Who would you rather hire:
The second person, disliking the "fireman" syndrome so common in support departments, would have to be defined as lazy in that he/she is disinclined to work putting out fires. One can argue that the time spent in preventing the fires in the first place disqualifies the person from being called lazy. It's a shame that upper management tends to look at hard numbers, and it is much more difficult to provide a number for prevented problems, than it is to provide a number for solved problems. Upper management sees that person A solved 30 problems, person B ( the lazy one ) solved 10 problems in the same time period. However, management often does not quantify the extra work person B did to prevent those 20 problems, they just give person A great praise, and quietly replace person B for "underperforming".
Suffice it to say, I'd rather hire the lazy ones.
You're right - a good MCSE is an asset to a company running Windows. Heck - a good admin familiar with his employer's arhictecture is an asset to any company. But I disagree with your dismisal of paper MCSE's.
Maybe its the difference between your working environment and mine. A real possibility since I've worked both within outstanding resource-rich environments and with organizations who, to be polite, are simply cheap. In any case, I have seen a real market for the stereotypical paper MCSE. They exist. And they keep their jobs.
Don't get me wrong - not all MCSEs are of that sort. I've met some very technical Windows types that had a rather in-depth knowledge of the platform. Which has lead to some really great technical discussions (and some very handy exchanges of expertise from time to time). But I've found them to rare.
This is kind of an odd thing to say. After all, when do we throw a Windows admin at a Solaris system?
Its interesting that the tool anology comes up. The whole reason techies get impassioned about verious systems and whatnot has a lot to do with craftsmen and tools. After all, sysadmins tend to be craftsmen. And while an expert craftsman might be able to make a chair using nothing but a hammer and screwdriver, they're definately going to feel contrained. They won't be able to produce the level of work they know they could with the right tools (or at least tools they are comfortable with).
My work desktop environment right now is Win2K due to various contraints (office automation apps, a few Windows machines I have to keep an eye on, etc). Yet I go to quite a bit of trouble to make that environment as Unix-like as I can. I really prefer that environment. And I've been able to pull off a few things recently that have had my coworkers wowed (thanks to Cygwin).
One last point - I've experienced both sides. I started as a rather oblivious Windows admin. Then I had to pick up some Unix machines and found an environment that I preferred. I will only grudgingly admin a Windows machine from this point on (and I ocassionally still do). I can certainly understand why people do not want to work with Windows systems. But then - I suppose I can sypmathize with anybody who doesn't want to touch *nix (even if I don't agree with them).
Someone claiming that a *nix admin should just learn to fix Windows instead of complaining about it sounds more like ignorance to me than insight.
- One of the students in a class had a photographic memory. He didn't understand why everyone didn't just read the book and go take the exam while the book was still in short-term memory.
- The Sr. VP where I work as a mainframe sysprog asked me if I knew anyone who was good at Windows debugging. I told him I knew some MCSE types. He said that if his IT department were a karate dojo, "MCSE" would be equivalent to "white belt" (rank beginner).- An instructor in an SQL Server class related the tale about a forklift operator who got laid off. He kept seeing job ads for "MCDBA" and asked around to find out what that meant. He didn't have the cash to actually take the courses but he bought the books and passed the exam (through luck, I guess) on the 14th attempt. He landed a job making $160K per year and kept it for six months before they realized he didn't know beans. He ended up $80K richer, though.
You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
"Math in a song is good."-Linford
The only way to get more information on this topic from the SuSE website is to download the PDF formatted docs.
I appreciate the presentation-control aspects that PDF gives to documents, but I don't think that it's too much to ask that a simple webpage with text information on it be provided as an alternative. I realize this is slightly OT, but in the slim hope that some SuSE webmaster/PR people are reading the thread: please some new-fashioned good ol' XHTML would do nicely instead. Thanks.