Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Won't Vouch For Linux
theodp writes "Gov. Christine Gregoire applauded Microsoft's job training partnership with WA state and county government agencies, which calls for the distribution of 30,625 training vouchers statewide during the next 90 days. 'This program [Elevate America] is all about equipping people with the new skills they'll need to get a job in the changing economy,' said Microsoft Counsel Brad Smith, who also made it very clear that getting 'workforce ready' won't involve acquiring any Linux skills. At least this offer appears to be no-cost, unlike the $35 Microsoft requested in an e-mail come-on for 'The Stimulus Package for Your Career' (so much for Smith's and Gregoire's war on spam)."
Because it's her own state's most famous industry. Obviously, people in such positions don't do this out of selfLESSness.
What the hell will some 35,000 vouchers for msoft training do for these people? The ONLY immediate TWO advantages they have that comes to mind:
-- trainable monkeys, as in likely not yet corrupted with their own ways of doing things for a very long time
-- entry-level pay
The disadvantages to/for existing, qualified cert holders:
-- insulting influx of competion, further invalidating prior certs and attendant costs
-- perception as being too expensive or too stuck in old ways
-- terrible economy for attained income level expections
I dare say that ms is:
-- just doing "make-work", and threatening the very people who already DO NOT NEED more, unjustified competition. Giving out 35,000 training vouchers is likely to ultimately prove to be a boondogle of taxpayer money (unless msoft wants to foot the bill and get the money back when these "trainees" buy ms training materials AFTER successful graduation...AND NOT ONE DAY BEFORE!)
-- facilitating a governer looking as if doing good when in THIS economy, it's likley just giving false hope to MANY people who'll get hired because HR can punch a ticket for a qualfied person; Accounting can sign off on lower pay; IT can chime in with HR on having obtained a qualified person
Just my off-the-cuff assertions.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Yes, I've had the unpleasant experience of providing this kind of training through a state agency (not Washington state). The training material will be from existing companies that are Microsoft-approved to do the teaching; the dollars Microsoft pays out will stay within the Microsoft ecosystem. The training will cover basic Windows operations and portions of MS Office (typically Access training is weak or non-existent, while PowerPoint is unduly emphasized). Graduates will have skills in such things as creating form letters and mailing lists, and doing arithmetic operations in a spreadsheet. The result is similar to training someone who has never driven a vehicle in how to "drive" a truck-- turn the wheel, work the pedals-- without actually teaching them how to back up to a loading dock, what adding 10 ton of gravel will do to their stopping distance, or what common road hazards they need to know about. (I'm so sorry, my fellow slashdotters, but I couldn't think of a car analogy.)
It should be noted that these training materials are tightly integrated into the version of MS software they were developed for. That is, the materials for MS Office 2003 cannot be used effectively with MS Office 2007, because they identify tasks by keystroke and menu selections that change with each version, leaving students hopelessly confused. So undoubtedly all these training vouchers will need to be used on Win7 computers loaded with Office 2007. Graduates will need some retraining if they are hired by employers using WinXP and Office 2003.
Graduates of these courses are definitely better off than they were beforehand. But there are really serious questions about whether this level of "pull the blue knob A until the yellow dial C shows 950 rpm" is the most effective way to prepare someone for the work force. There are probably less costly and more effective ways of making someone employable. Most of the good the students I've worked with have received has been in secondary benefits (improved self-confidence; how to actually follow instructions, learning to get along in a classroom / office setting, etc), and these would be part of any other training program. It takes about 6 months to bring someone through all the MS courses, and even if the courses are free, that's 6 months State paid benefits and support invested in the student. Which far outweighs the costs of the training itself. If that much is going to be invested, maybe there needs to be some serious evaluation of whether the training is actually going to make student more job-capable than putting him or her through other training.
In under 6 months, I could train someone who had never sat at a computer to maintain and develop effective web pages using commonly available tools like Firefox and a text editor. By the end of that time, these students would be competent at repurposing word processor documents into web pages, constructing simpler web sites, applying CSS, and working with Javascript to achieve common DHTML effects. They would have skills in breaking down jobs into constituent tasks, tracking their progress toward completion, and finding resources and assistance as needed. If they could not find a full time employer (can be difficult for a single mother with tots at home), they would be capable of free lance work from a low cost computer on their kitchen table.
Sure. If you got with Ubuntu, which I'd recommend, then your support comes from Canonical.
If you got with Red Hat then they'll provide the support.
Amazingly enough, it happens that whatever company makes the Linux distro provides support for it, just like Windows and Mac. Let's hope your employer doesn't put people as stupid as you in charge of making decisions because you clearly fail at logic.