At least I am not alone. As a mid-level programmer, I have been befuddled at job postings that want a VERY specific set of skills. I often wondered if these people were reasonable in their expactations. At least I am not the only one who finds it absurd.
Really, how many programmers are there out there in the world that have the EXACT experience some of these companies are looking for? How is a person ever suppossed to get out in the marketplace and get the experience, when companies already want a tightly defined set of skills before they will even consider you? (Sorry, I don't know how to integrate your toaster with your TV using Python running on a PalmPilot.)
I am not physically disabled, but I am financially unable to quit work to attend college full time and the courses I need aren't available at night. So I am stuck with the online option which isn't really bad.
First thing, be aware of recruiters. I don't think you will have a problem here at this site, but if you go to some popular newsgroups for advice be ready to hear all about Mountain Air University or some other unheard of colleges. When I used to ask for advice, I would get some off the wall responses from people who were so sure that this college in Canada or that college in a cave in Arkansas was the right choice. Just beware of anyone who seems TOO willing to push a college down your throat.
Some online college rules in general. Be sure that it is accredited. I don't know what the accrediting body in the UK is that accredits all the traditional colleges, but find out. Then, any online college you attend should have that exact same accreditation. If not, don't bother. Any high school kid can throw up a website and sell degrees, but is anyone going to accept the degree? Probably not.
Secondly look at the courses the traditional colleges offer and compare those against the cirriculumn at the online colleges. If they aren't 80% the same, then your degree won't be usuable. No one wants a Computer Science degree holder who only took two computer related courses. Just like you wouldn't want a doctor who took one Anatomy class and the rest were your basic college courses. Make sure that the degree is going to actually teach you what employers are going to expect you to know. I would get a copy of the cirriculumn from a traditional university in the UK and compare it to any online college your consider.
Just because they run a computer store, doesn't mean they know their Cisco router from their Unix mainframe. Having worked for a few different small town computer stores, I have found the people that work there to be "mainstream" computer users, although there are exceptions. I don't think I would expect a warm reception from anyone you talk to. Unless it is a MS product, they won't be interested. If they knew anything to begin with, you wouldn't have to "educate" them.
I have run into people who thoroughly enjoy picking apart movies. Not so much because the movie is bad, but because it makes them feel good about themselves that they weren't taken in by a move that everyone else liked. That they were too smart to get taken in like everyone else. It feeds their own superiority to point out every mistake in a movie and how everyone else is inferior for liking such an obviously bad movie. They are also the same type of people who sit in the window of a restaurant so they can talk about everyone that walks past. They don't do things because they want to, but to make fun of the people who do.
For what it is, Episode III is a good movie. It is no where near as bad as Battlefield Earth. It may not be exactly like the original trilogy, but if you get over the fact that we no longer live in the late 70's early 80's you will see that the movie is good.
I agree with everything you said. Most employers only check out your last job, figuring that job checked out your last job and so on. Since you are already hired, just focus on making a good impression at your new job. That is all that matters now.
This seems like a sales pitch to me. Which 100% guarantees I will never ever in a million years buy it. Nor will I ever encourage anyone to buy it. In fact, if I got to work at a company and they use it, I will be sure to bad mouth it at ever turn until I get them to switch to something else. So thanks for the sales pitch, it worked as planned.
On occassions where I needed to leave a company, I consulted all manner of advice. The consensus was always that the 2 weeks notice only benefits the employer. From what I have read, the best thing is to offer a few days notice and then to help them train someone to take over. After all, they should promote someone into your position instead of hiring from outside the company. If it is someone from within the company, the training should be no more than a week. If they decide to hire outside the company, then that is their choice and they take on the burden of training them. I have never once given 2 weeks notice and it has never come back to haunt me.
You have proven the advice that a 2 weeks notice gives the employer ample opportunity to drag you name through the mud. This is so the employer will have the upper hand in saying that he had to let you go, instead of you leaving him. If I were you, I would already be gone, citing your bosses behavior. You already have a job lined up. And if your boss continues to berate you after you leave, you have a legal case against him.
To answer you question though, there is very little you can do to leave on good terms. If your employer is bent on being a jerk, nothing you can do. Don't worry about leaving on good terms. Worry about leaving with your reputation in tact. Leaving on good terms has more to do with sitting down with your boss and explaining your decision, then leaving. It has less to do with how long you stay around. If you had left the same day you advised your boss of your decision, he would have had zero opportunity to make you loook bad.
Most places use the term interchangeably. However, in general a network admin is responsible for just the network such as servers, security and connectivity. Systems Admin is a catch all that can include the network as well as desktop OS, applications, programming, etc.
Didn't the person specifically say that they wanted to be a network admin? Why is everyone introducing these alternate scenarios in to a very simple case. Now if the person wanted to be a network admin and hopefully one day move on to be a programmer, or systems admin then my opinion would be different. But this person specifically stated what they wanted to be, a network admin. Since this person only wants one thing, I am not going to introduce "if you ever want to be a (insert job here)" scenarios. No since in over complicating the situation or introducing a complex solution to a simple situation.
The person said all you need is a HS Diploma and to know your stuff. You have introduced education into a conversation that excluded education. You say that "you could go the clueless route and not know what you are doing." I am not the one advocating that, that is what the message I was replying to was advocating. I am not the one say you don't need education, the other person is. I basically agree with everything you said and have since the beginning.
And when you go to interview for jobs, you will have an easier time convincing people to hire you. Simply because you will be more comfortable because you have so much hands on experiencing. The college grads aren't going to impress much with their stunning knowledge of literature or micro-biology.
I don't know what field you work in, but this question was specifically about networking. Having worked around that area and interviewed for some positions, I haven't met one CS graduate. They are all paper certs. This person wanted to know what was best for working in a network environment. Trade school is still the best way to go. Just because you don't go to college doesn't mean you can't be well-spoken and literate.
This particular question came from a person who wants to be a network admin. Nothing about being a manager was discussed. For the sole purpose of working on networks, I stick by the trade school. A person will get more hands on experience and everything they learn and pay for will relate directly to their job. Trade schools may not be the intillectual equivalent of college, but most employers aren't going to be impressed with degrees anyway. Doesn't matter if it is college or trade shool, they will probe you for what you know. And generally, trade school graduates are going to know more about networking fresh out of school, than a college graduate will. This is because the trade school graduate was focused on one subject and learned all he could about that subject. Where as the college grad had some networking theory and maybe a few specific class discussion.
I do agree that college is best for everyone, but not everyone wants to go to college. Just because you don't go to college doesn't mean you can't still find viable employment. And just because you go to college doesn't necessarily mean you won't ever have a problem finding employment. Life may be about more than just a job, but tell that to a man who spent 6 months working at a fast food joint before I found my current position. Being a student doesn't do much for my desire to eat and have a car. I interviewed for two network jobs. One guy offered me the job, but didn't present me with a "learning environment." I was either going to know my stuff in a week or two, or he was going to let me go. The other guy didn't hire me. They were both MCSE type positions and I know networking, but I don't know the exact buttons to push on a MS network. So being a junior in CS doesn't mean half as much as MCSE certificate. I know it is crazy and doesn't make any sense, but that is the way the world has worked since the creation of IT. Some days I am tempted to drop out of school and get my paper cert. May not be the intellectual equivalent of a college degree, but with all the money I would be making, I wouldn't mind so much.
Last point: I don't think networking will ever be downsized. Dell, HP, and Gateway could sell an all-in-one networking device, but they won't. An all-in-one solution wouldn't allow much scalability or flexibility in a network. Outsourcing networking isn't an option since changing out a firewall requires a physciall presence. 9 out of 10 jobs in my area are for network techs. I view networking as the most stable position in all of computer technology.
Your post doesn't present any usable advice. You can't get a job in a field without experience and you can't get experience without a job. So how does one get into the field? They either start at the very bottom and hope to one day work their way up to where they want to be; or they get some type of education in the subject.
I am tired of people saying that all you need is "to know what you are doing." But these people never explain how they "know what they are doing." Experience counts in any profession, so that is a non-starter. Sort of like saying that you need to wear clothes for your interview. It is frivulous advice. If people want to actually give useful advice, explain how one goes about learning what they need to know. But simply saying that all you need is to "know what you are doing" is so simplistic and won't help anyone.
The University will waste your time and money with classes that have no bearing on your job. The University usually focuses on theory and generalizations of concepts with some specifics. Universities are more interested in creating a well rounded educated employee. But, employers don't care if you took Western Civ. They want to know if you can fix their network. Having said that, you do need to understand network theory. Learning how to run a MS based network is different from actually knowing how networks in general operate. This is knowledge that you can pick up through books.
If you KNOW that network admin is what you want, then got to the trade school. They will teach you alot of information that will be very useful in the job market and a lot of their classes will be hands on with networks. If you aren't positive, the course is only two years. When you get out you can try another major. In the mean time you have a degree of some type. This will at least help you get some money rolling in while you decide what you want to do. Never underestimate the need to pay your car note, rent, electric bill and cable.
Going the experience route won't get you anywhere. Very few people are willing to hire someone with no prior experience in networking. Even if a company does hire you, they aren't going to teach you diddly squat. They will expect you to learn on your own, which is great if you can pick it up quickly. If you have problems understanding some concepts they won't be nurturing. They will just fire you.
I never read the books, never listened to the radio show and never watched the TV show. I played all of 2 minutes of the game. So with no prior knowledge of the story, what did I think?
It was a very good movie. I like sci-fi in general but I also saw it with my wife who doesn't. She was able to enjoy it for the humor. Only thing I knew of the story is that it was suppossed to be quirky, which the movie is. If you don't like the movie because it isn't a word for word telling of the book or it didn't match your ideas perfectly then you must not enjoy movies at all.
I am a CS student. True, I have a love for computers. At the same time, I don't want to spend 4 years of my life studying a topic only to find out that there are no jobs. You can love many things, but at the same time you have to pay the bills. I love computers and want to work in the industry, but I also want to be able to pay my electric bill at the end of the month. Picking a subject you love is a no brainer. But specializing in something that is going to keep money coming in isn't.
Off the top of my head, networking is a pretty abundant area. Most of the everyday jobs you will see are in this area. Programming is nice, but there isn't a need for a C++ programming in every community. On the other hand, even small town stores and businesses need networks. And networks are one aspect that can't be outsourced to foreign countries. Someone in India can't physically replace the router in Kansas.
I have worked tech support for a few years now while I attend school. Having been on the wrong side of too many "My computer crashed and what do you mean you can't fix it sight unseen over the phone for free?" conversations, I can easily answer why some people are adamant about switching.
Simply because we are tired of hearing about all the problems people have out of something. We have suggested to our customers for a long time that they switch to various applications. Why do we suggest Firefox? Because people who use Firefox don't call every week when it is jampacked full of spyware to the point where they can't get anyway. We only get those calls from IE uses. Why do we suggest Mac or Linux? Because those users don't call every week with another computer crash. Why do we suggest any switch? Because the switch will make our problems less.
You may be happy with what you have, and in that case carry on. But for those who call every day with some sort of problem, please switch.
I have been working IT for the past 4 years as well as working on my CS and looking into some ceritifications. Based on the feedback I got from the certification crowd about their sub $60k jobs being horrible, here is how I view it.
In the early 90's when computers were taking off and every business was convinced that the IT department was the heart and soul of the company, they didn't really understand who should be working on these projects. Certification companies such as CompTia and Microsoft convinced a lot of major business that certifications were all they needed. They didn't need someone who spent 4 years earning a degree because they really loved computers. No, they needed the person who studied for one year to get some certification to run their IT.
They were also able to convince these businesses that these certifications were so important that it required huge salaries to go along with them. Salaries in the range of $60k all the way to $100k. Just for a piece of paper. So over the course of a few years, a lot businesses began to realize that they are paying people who have done nothing more than take a series of tests, more than some of their executives who studied four years for a degree. This is when the tech bubble burst.It amounts to greed.
Now, don't get me wrong, certifications are okay, if you have a love of computers and are able to "flesh" out your knowledge. But if all you did was study a book and take some tests, then you don't know squat about computers. Infact, I know of several people who never even used computers before or since, who were able to get their certifications. This lack of knowledge started to diminish the view of the entire IT field. Now, even legitimate CS graduates have a hard time finding work in a company that was burned by some fast talking suit who didn't know what "Safe Mode" in Windows was, because it wasn't in the book.
You are probably wondering how I quantify these statements. Well, recently I was looking to supplement my CS theory based education with some practical knowledge that would benefit me short term. I was looking into the MCSE for a short while. I happened upon a discussion group and started asking what was the best way to get started. The only replies I got back where "There is no money in it, I suggest being a (insert career here). I only make $60k a year and haven't been able to hire anyone for more than $40k for a long time." Seems like a very ignorant thing to say to someone making less than $20k a year. So doubling my salary isn't worth it? How greedy. And because of this greed, companies are lowering salaries. No wonder no one wants to study a field were too many people have been burned before to even give you a chance.
First thing that sticks out at me, is did the execs approach the IT department about doing a security study? If they went straight to an outside source, it could be a sign that they don't trust you. I can understand if they felt their own IT department was overwhelmed with current projects, but did they even get your input before moving forward? Were they intersted in plugging their security holes, or where they interested in checking up on the IT department?
I believe your viewpoint is that the 3rd party company over exaggerated the security risks inorder to justify their price tag for the study. I don't think I would necessarily disagree with you. It isn't indicative of the entire security industry, but there are some companies that are just out for the quick buck. I wouldn't be so fast to dismiss their findings, though
Most execs only understand money. They wouldn't give a rat's butt about security holes, if they weren't convinced it would cost them money. So what you need to do is itemize each security hole. List the possiblity of an attack through the security hole, and how long it would take to fix it. Give a cost estimate for how much it would cost in terms of labor hours to fix it. Also figure up how much money would be lost during down time. Lastly, estimate how many hours and the labor costs it would take to fix the problem. If it is going to take $1200 to patch a hole now that at worst would cost $100 to recover from, and $100 in lost revenue; then it shouldn't be a priority. On the other hand if it would take $100 to fix it now and $300 to recover from it during down time, then obviously it is worth fixing. Basic just show them the cost difference between patching and recovering. Allow the execs to review and decide how they want to spend money. This will also show them how petty some holes might be.
Lastly, don't take it personally. Yes it does look like they are trying to blame the IT department for the security holes, but in the world of IT their can be a difference of opinion. There can be multiple rights and wrongs. You need to stress this; that although the 3rd party has one opinion, you have another. Doesn't mean one party is right and the other is wrong.
If they wanted you to sign something as you left the company, it seems to me that they didn't make you sign it when you were hired. You signed a standard NDA, but they didn't make you sign anything stating that whatever you produce is their sole property and you aren't allowed to keep a copy. How do I know this? Because if you had signed it at the start of the job, they wouldn't need you to sign it at the end. Once is enough.
It seems like their legal department goofed and tried to fix the problem. Now, I understand that what you produce at work belongs to your employer, but there is nothing keeping you from making a copy for your portfolio(As long as your copy didn't contain any valuable data). But you didn't HAVE to sign. They were letting you go, it doesn't make sense to sign anything once they let you go. Why cooperate with the people who layed you off? They can't sue you for not signing. In fact, you had them over the barrell. Until you signed that paper, you could have negotiated for a better severance package. Ultimately the judge in the case would have ruled in their favor, and maybe let you keep a copy. But you could have tied it up in the courts, and gotten a temporary injuction against them using the program. That thought alone would have made for a quick settlement.
I have taken a class or two in business law, but I am NOT an expert. Take this with a grain of salt.
The idea to incorporate seems to be a sensible one. Besides the immediate benefits to this particular issue, it can afford you benefits down the line. I am guessing you are hoping to turn this freelancing into a full time business. If so, incorporating can literally save your neck. All responsibility is put on the corporation and not the individual. You act as a employee of the company; and in most cases can't be held responsible for the actions of the company even if you are the CEO (As long as you don't break any laws.) If your company runs into any legal problems, it is the company's problem and they can't touch your personal assets. The easiest state to incorporate in is Deleware. You can usually do it for hundreds of dollars. As a corporation you would only be working on behalf of the corporation. As long as you sign contracts on behalf of your company, you could always quit. They can hold your corporation to the terms, but not you. No employee of the company may engage in work with the competition, but you will not be an employee of the company. So you can't be held to it. Not unless you signed a noncompete with the corporation that you formed.
I also must suggest that you play hardball from the beginning. In the business world, you are going to meet people who are bound and determined to intimidate their workers. They do this to give themselves the advantage in negotiations. You must mentally tell yourself that you don't need their money, that you are doing them a favor. If you allow them, they will have you working 18 hour shifts for minimum wage. On the other hand, if you are confident in yourself they will respect you more. Most of the time, with this attitude people are going to believe that you are worth the money because you have so much confidence. Now true, you might loose a job here and there, but they are jobs you don't want anyway. I have been around enough to see this happen many many times. We have turned down jobs, only to find out that they hired the competition to an insanely stupid contract that they can't get out of. Don't worry if your competition gets the job over you. Chances are that your competition will be getting screwed so bad in the deal that they will have to close shop. (I have seen it happen.)
Lastly, don't ever sign a noncompete clause. It seems that your potential client tried to throw one in. That basically makes you an employee of the company with no benefits. If they don't want you working for the competition suggest that they hire you as a fulltime employee. If they are going to hold you to their company, get some benefits out of it. If they balk at the idea, then don't even consider it. They don't ask the electric company not to sell electricity to their competitors. They don't ask the water company not to sell water to their competitor. So why are they asking you not to sell your services to their competitor? Chances are they can't hold you to the noncompete, but they can tie you up in court wasting all your hard earned money. Since most states won't enforce noncompetes except in some very rare instances, the real teeth in the clause comes from the money it would take to fight it out in court. This is their way of discouraging you from contesting in the future.
If you don't know what you want to study don't go. I wasted 5 semesters studing first Pre-Law and then Coummnications, and finally Computer Science. I have been studing Computer Science for two semesters now and I am positive that is what I want to do. However, going into my 7th semester in college, I am exhausted. I took so many classes that don't even count toward my degree. I also took two breaks between semesters. Once between the 3rd and 4th semester and once between 4th and 5th. I sat out a semester each time. To be honest, I have 3 semesters to go to just get an AS in CS. This is because the courses have to be taken in sequence, so I have to take a few courses each semester instead of doubling up. To be honest, at this point I am tired of being in school altogther and I am frustrated at the length it is taking. I know it is my fault for rushing in. That is my point. If you piddle around college for a few semesters you will get tired of it. It is best to go in knowing what you want and taking as few semesters as possible to get it. If you feel that you must go, then take ONLY courses that definitely transfer to any major you might want to take. I am talking the basic english, math, science and history. If you are forced to take more classes at least take fun or usefull classes. That way if you decide to leave school, at least you learned something interesting or useful. I had a friend who never graduated in engineering, but took one course in CAD for fun. He has made a nice living off of that one class.
Slashdot Mirror
...do most employers know how to do a web search?
At least I am not alone. As a mid-level programmer, I have been befuddled at job postings that want a VERY specific set of skills. I often wondered if these people were reasonable in their expactations. At least I am not the only one who finds it absurd. Really, how many programmers are there out there in the world that have the EXACT experience some of these companies are looking for? How is a person ever suppossed to get out in the marketplace and get the experience, when companies already want a tightly defined set of skills before they will even consider you? (Sorry, I don't know how to integrate your toaster with your TV using Python running on a PalmPilot.)
He should hang out at Best Buy and pick up kids? Meet students "hands-on"? I don't think he would be there long till the cops showed up.
I am not physically disabled, but I am financially unable to quit work to attend college full time and the courses I need aren't available at night. So I am stuck with the online option which isn't really bad.
First thing, be aware of recruiters. I don't think you will have a problem here at this site, but if you go to some popular newsgroups for advice be ready to hear all about Mountain Air University or some other unheard of colleges. When I used to ask for advice, I would get some off the wall responses from people who were so sure that this college in Canada or that college in a cave in Arkansas was the right choice. Just beware of anyone who seems TOO willing to push a college down your throat.
Some online college rules in general. Be sure that it is accredited. I don't know what the accrediting body in the UK is that accredits all the traditional colleges, but find out. Then, any online college you attend should have that exact same accreditation. If not, don't bother. Any high school kid can throw up a website and sell degrees, but is anyone going to accept the degree? Probably not.
Secondly look at the courses the traditional colleges offer and compare those against the cirriculumn at the online colleges. If they aren't 80% the same, then your degree won't be usuable. No one wants a Computer Science degree holder who only took two computer related courses. Just like you wouldn't want a doctor who took one Anatomy class and the rest were your basic college courses. Make sure that the degree is going to actually teach you what employers are going to expect you to know. I would get a copy of the cirriculumn from a traditional university in the UK and compare it to any online college your consider.
Just because they run a computer store, doesn't mean they know their Cisco router from their Unix mainframe. Having worked for a few different small town computer stores, I have found the people that work there to be "mainstream" computer users, although there are exceptions. I don't think I would expect a warm reception from anyone you talk to. Unless it is a MS product, they won't be interested. If they knew anything to begin with, you wouldn't have to "educate" them.
I have run into people who thoroughly enjoy picking apart movies. Not so much because the movie is bad, but because it makes them feel good about themselves that they weren't taken in by a move that everyone else liked. That they were too smart to get taken in like everyone else. It feeds their own superiority to point out every mistake in a movie and how everyone else is inferior for liking such an obviously bad movie. They are also the same type of people who sit in the window of a restaurant so they can talk about everyone that walks past. They don't do things because they want to, but to make fun of the people who do.
For what it is, Episode III is a good movie. It is no where near as bad as Battlefield Earth. It may not be exactly like the original trilogy, but if you get over the fact that we no longer live in the late 70's early 80's you will see that the movie is good.
I agree with everything you said. Most employers only check out your last job, figuring that job checked out your last job and so on. Since you are already hired, just focus on making a good impression at your new job. That is all that matters now.
This seems like a sales pitch to me. Which 100% guarantees I will never ever in a million years buy it. Nor will I ever encourage anyone to buy it. In fact, if I got to work at a company and they use it, I will be sure to bad mouth it at ever turn until I get them to switch to something else. So thanks for the sales pitch, it worked as planned.
On occassions where I needed to leave a company, I consulted all manner of advice. The consensus was always that the 2 weeks notice only benefits the employer. From what I have read, the best thing is to offer a few days notice and then to help them train someone to take over. After all, they should promote someone into your position instead of hiring from outside the company. If it is someone from within the company, the training should be no more than a week. If they decide to hire outside the company, then that is their choice and they take on the burden of training them. I have never once given 2 weeks notice and it has never come back to haunt me.
You have proven the advice that a 2 weeks notice gives the employer ample opportunity to drag you name through the mud. This is so the employer will have the upper hand in saying that he had to let you go, instead of you leaving him. If I were you, I would already be gone, citing your bosses behavior. You already have a job lined up. And if your boss continues to berate you after you leave, you have a legal case against him.
To answer you question though, there is very little you can do to leave on good terms. If your employer is bent on being a jerk, nothing you can do. Don't worry about leaving on good terms. Worry about leaving with your reputation in tact. Leaving on good terms has more to do with sitting down with your boss and explaining your decision, then leaving. It has less to do with how long you stay around. If you had left the same day you advised your boss of your decision, he would have had zero opportunity to make you loook bad.
Most places use the term interchangeably. However, in general a network admin is responsible for just the network such as servers, security and connectivity. Systems Admin is a catch all that can include the network as well as desktop OS, applications, programming, etc.
Didn't the person specifically say that they wanted to be a network admin? Why is everyone introducing these alternate scenarios in to a very simple case. Now if the person wanted to be a network admin and hopefully one day move on to be a programmer, or systems admin then my opinion would be different. But this person specifically stated what they wanted to be, a network admin. Since this person only wants one thing, I am not going to introduce "if you ever want to be a (insert job here)" scenarios. No since in over complicating the situation or introducing a complex solution to a simple situation.
The person said all you need is a HS Diploma and to know your stuff. You have introduced education into a conversation that excluded education. You say that "you could go the clueless route and not know what you are doing." I am not the one advocating that, that is what the message I was replying to was advocating. I am not the one say you don't need education, the other person is. I basically agree with everything you said and have since the beginning.
And when you go to interview for jobs, you will have an easier time convincing people to hire you. Simply because you will be more comfortable because you have so much hands on experiencing. The college grads aren't going to impress much with their stunning knowledge of literature or micro-biology.
I don't know what field you work in, but this question was specifically about networking. Having worked around that area and interviewed for some positions, I haven't met one CS graduate. They are all paper certs. This person wanted to know what was best for working in a network environment. Trade school is still the best way to go. Just because you don't go to college doesn't mean you can't be well-spoken and literate.
This particular question came from a person who wants to be a network admin. Nothing about being a manager was discussed. For the sole purpose of working on networks, I stick by the trade school. A person will get more hands on experience and everything they learn and pay for will relate directly to their job. Trade schools may not be the intillectual equivalent of college, but most employers aren't going to be impressed with degrees anyway. Doesn't matter if it is college or trade shool, they will probe you for what you know. And generally, trade school graduates are going to know more about networking fresh out of school, than a college graduate will. This is because the trade school graduate was focused on one subject and learned all he could about that subject. Where as the college grad had some networking theory and maybe a few specific class discussion.
I do agree that college is best for everyone, but not everyone wants to go to college. Just because you don't go to college doesn't mean you can't still find viable employment. And just because you go to college doesn't necessarily mean you won't ever have a problem finding employment. Life may be about more than just a job, but tell that to a man who spent 6 months working at a fast food joint before I found my current position. Being a student doesn't do much for my desire to eat and have a car. I interviewed for two network jobs. One guy offered me the job, but didn't present me with a "learning environment." I was either going to know my stuff in a week or two, or he was going to let me go. The other guy didn't hire me. They were both MCSE type positions and I know networking, but I don't know the exact buttons to push on a MS network. So being a junior in CS doesn't mean half as much as MCSE certificate. I know it is crazy and doesn't make any sense, but that is the way the world has worked since the creation of IT. Some days I am tempted to drop out of school and get my paper cert. May not be the intellectual equivalent of a college degree, but with all the money I would be making, I wouldn't mind so much.
Last point: I don't think networking will ever be downsized. Dell, HP, and Gateway could sell an all-in-one networking device, but they won't. An all-in-one solution wouldn't allow much scalability or flexibility in a network. Outsourcing networking isn't an option since changing out a firewall requires a physciall presence. 9 out of 10 jobs in my area are for network techs. I view networking as the most stable position in all of computer technology.
Your post doesn't present any usable advice. You can't get a job in a field without experience and you can't get experience without a job. So how does one get into the field? They either start at the very bottom and hope to one day work their way up to where they want to be; or they get some type of education in the subject.
I am tired of people saying that all you need is "to know what you are doing." But these people never explain how they "know what they are doing." Experience counts in any profession, so that is a non-starter. Sort of like saying that you need to wear clothes for your interview. It is frivulous advice. If people want to actually give useful advice, explain how one goes about learning what they need to know. But simply saying that all you need is to "know what you are doing" is so simplistic and won't help anyone.
The University will waste your time and money with classes that have no bearing on your job. The University usually focuses on theory and generalizations of concepts with some specifics. Universities are more interested in creating a well rounded educated employee. But, employers don't care if you took Western Civ. They want to know if you can fix their network. Having said that, you do need to understand network theory. Learning how to run a MS based network is different from actually knowing how networks in general operate. This is knowledge that you can pick up through books.
If you KNOW that network admin is what you want, then got to the trade school. They will teach you alot of information that will be very useful in the job market and a lot of their classes will be hands on with networks. If you aren't positive, the course is only two years. When you get out you can try another major. In the mean time you have a degree of some type. This will at least help you get some money rolling in while you decide what you want to do. Never underestimate the need to pay your car note, rent, electric bill and cable.
Going the experience route won't get you anywhere. Very few people are willing to hire someone with no prior experience in networking. Even if a company does hire you, they aren't going to teach you diddly squat. They will expect you to learn on your own, which is great if you can pick it up quickly. If you have problems understanding some concepts they won't be nurturing. They will just fire you.
I never read the books, never listened to the radio show and never watched the TV show. I played all of 2 minutes of the game. So with no prior knowledge of the story, what did I think?
It was a very good movie. I like sci-fi in general but I also saw it with my wife who doesn't. She was able to enjoy it for the humor. Only thing I knew of the story is that it was suppossed to be quirky, which the movie is. If you don't like the movie because it isn't a word for word telling of the book or it didn't match your ideas perfectly then you must not enjoy movies at all.
I am a CS student. True, I have a love for computers. At the same time, I don't want to spend 4 years of my life studying a topic only to find out that there are no jobs. You can love many things, but at the same time you have to pay the bills. I love computers and want to work in the industry, but I also want to be able to pay my electric bill at the end of the month. Picking a subject you love is a no brainer. But specializing in something that is going to keep money coming in isn't.
Off the top of my head, networking is a pretty abundant area. Most of the everyday jobs you will see are in this area. Programming is nice, but there isn't a need for a C++ programming in every community. On the other hand, even small town stores and businesses need networks. And networks are one aspect that can't be outsourced to foreign countries. Someone in India can't physically replace the router in Kansas.
I have worked tech support for a few years now while I attend school. Having been on the wrong side of too many "My computer crashed and what do you mean you can't fix it sight unseen over the phone for free?" conversations, I can easily answer why some people are adamant about switching.
Simply because we are tired of hearing about all the problems people have out of something. We have suggested to our customers for a long time that they switch to various applications. Why do we suggest Firefox? Because people who use Firefox don't call every week when it is jampacked full of spyware to the point where they can't get anyway. We only get those calls from IE uses. Why do we suggest Mac or Linux? Because those users don't call every week with another computer crash. Why do we suggest any switch? Because the switch will make our problems less.
You may be happy with what you have, and in that case carry on. But for those who call every day with some sort of problem, please switch.
I have been working IT for the past 4 years as well as working on my CS and looking into some ceritifications. Based on the feedback I got from the certification crowd about their sub $60k jobs being horrible, here is how I view it.
In the early 90's when computers were taking off and every business was convinced that the IT department was the heart and soul of the company, they didn't really understand who should be working on these projects. Certification companies such as CompTia and Microsoft convinced a lot of major business that certifications were all they needed. They didn't need someone who spent 4 years earning a degree because they really loved computers. No, they needed the person who studied for one year to get some certification to run their IT.
They were also able to convince these businesses that these certifications were so important that it required huge salaries to go along with them. Salaries in the range of $60k all the way to $100k. Just for a piece of paper. So over the course of a few years, a lot businesses began to realize that they are paying people who have done nothing more than take a series of tests, more than some of their executives who studied four years for a degree. This is when the tech bubble burst.It amounts to greed.
Now, don't get me wrong, certifications are okay, if you have a love of computers and are able to "flesh" out your knowledge. But if all you did was study a book and take some tests, then you don't know squat about computers. Infact, I know of several people who never even used computers before or since, who were able to get their certifications. This lack of knowledge started to diminish the view of the entire IT field. Now, even legitimate CS graduates have a hard time finding work in a company that was burned by some fast talking suit who didn't know what "Safe Mode" in Windows was, because it wasn't in the book.
You are probably wondering how I quantify these statements. Well, recently I was looking to supplement my CS theory based education with some practical knowledge that would benefit me short term. I was looking into the MCSE for a short while. I happened upon a discussion group and started asking what was the best way to get started. The only replies I got back where "There is no money in it, I suggest being a (insert career here). I only make $60k a year and haven't been able to hire anyone for more than $40k for a long time." Seems like a very ignorant thing to say to someone making less than $20k a year. So doubling my salary isn't worth it? How greedy. And because of this greed, companies are lowering salaries. No wonder no one wants to study a field were too many people have been burned before to even give you a chance.
First thing that sticks out at me, is did the execs approach the IT department about doing a security study? If they went straight to an outside source, it could be a sign that they don't trust you. I can understand if they felt their own IT department was overwhelmed with current projects, but did they even get your input before moving forward? Were they intersted in plugging their security holes, or where they interested in checking up on the IT department?
I believe your viewpoint is that the 3rd party company over exaggerated the security risks inorder to justify their price tag for the study. I don't think I would necessarily disagree with you. It isn't indicative of the entire security industry, but there are some companies that are just out for the quick buck. I wouldn't be so fast to dismiss their findings, though
Most execs only understand money. They wouldn't give a rat's butt about security holes, if they weren't convinced it would cost them money. So what you need to do is itemize each security hole. List the possiblity of an attack through the security hole, and how long it would take to fix it. Give a cost estimate for how much it would cost in terms of labor hours to fix it. Also figure up how much money would be lost during down time. Lastly, estimate how many hours and the labor costs it would take to fix the problem. If it is going to take $1200 to patch a hole now that at worst would cost $100 to recover from, and $100 in lost revenue; then it shouldn't be a priority. On the other hand if it would take $100 to fix it now and $300 to recover from it during down time, then obviously it is worth fixing. Basic just show them the cost difference between patching and recovering. Allow the execs to review and decide how they want to spend money. This will also show them how petty some holes might be.
Lastly, don't take it personally. Yes it does look like they are trying to blame the IT department for the security holes, but in the world of IT their can be a difference of opinion. There can be multiple rights and wrongs. You need to stress this; that although the 3rd party has one opinion, you have another. Doesn't mean one party is right and the other is wrong.
If they wanted you to sign something as you left the company, it seems to me that they didn't make you sign it when you were hired. You signed a standard NDA, but they didn't make you sign anything stating that whatever you produce is their sole property and you aren't allowed to keep a copy. How do I know this? Because if you had signed it at the start of the job, they wouldn't need you to sign it at the end. Once is enough.
It seems like their legal department goofed and tried to fix the problem. Now, I understand that what you produce at work belongs to your employer, but there is nothing keeping you from making a copy for your portfolio(As long as your copy didn't contain any valuable data). But you didn't HAVE to sign. They were letting you go, it doesn't make sense to sign anything once they let you go. Why cooperate with the people who layed you off? They can't sue you for not signing. In fact, you had them over the barrell. Until you signed that paper, you could have negotiated for a better severance package. Ultimately the judge in the case would have ruled in their favor, and maybe let you keep a copy. But you could have tied it up in the courts, and gotten a temporary injuction against them using the program. That thought alone would have made for a quick settlement.
I have taken a class or two in business law, but I am NOT an expert. Take this with a grain of salt. The idea to incorporate seems to be a sensible one. Besides the immediate benefits to this particular issue, it can afford you benefits down the line. I am guessing you are hoping to turn this freelancing into a full time business. If so, incorporating can literally save your neck. All responsibility is put on the corporation and not the individual. You act as a employee of the company; and in most cases can't be held responsible for the actions of the company even if you are the CEO (As long as you don't break any laws.) If your company runs into any legal problems, it is the company's problem and they can't touch your personal assets. The easiest state to incorporate in is Deleware. You can usually do it for hundreds of dollars. As a corporation you would only be working on behalf of the corporation. As long as you sign contracts on behalf of your company, you could always quit. They can hold your corporation to the terms, but not you. No employee of the company may engage in work with the competition, but you will not be an employee of the company. So you can't be held to it. Not unless you signed a noncompete with the corporation that you formed. I also must suggest that you play hardball from the beginning. In the business world, you are going to meet people who are bound and determined to intimidate their workers. They do this to give themselves the advantage in negotiations. You must mentally tell yourself that you don't need their money, that you are doing them a favor. If you allow them, they will have you working 18 hour shifts for minimum wage. On the other hand, if you are confident in yourself they will respect you more. Most of the time, with this attitude people are going to believe that you are worth the money because you have so much confidence. Now true, you might loose a job here and there, but they are jobs you don't want anyway. I have been around enough to see this happen many many times. We have turned down jobs, only to find out that they hired the competition to an insanely stupid contract that they can't get out of. Don't worry if your competition gets the job over you. Chances are that your competition will be getting screwed so bad in the deal that they will have to close shop. (I have seen it happen.) Lastly, don't ever sign a noncompete clause. It seems that your potential client tried to throw one in. That basically makes you an employee of the company with no benefits. If they don't want you working for the competition suggest that they hire you as a fulltime employee. If they are going to hold you to their company, get some benefits out of it. If they balk at the idea, then don't even consider it. They don't ask the electric company not to sell electricity to their competitors. They don't ask the water company not to sell water to their competitor. So why are they asking you not to sell your services to their competitor? Chances are they can't hold you to the noncompete, but they can tie you up in court wasting all your hard earned money. Since most states won't enforce noncompetes except in some very rare instances, the real teeth in the clause comes from the money it would take to fight it out in court. This is their way of discouraging you from contesting in the future.
If you don't know what you want to study don't go. I wasted 5 semesters studing first Pre-Law and then Coummnications, and finally Computer Science. I have been studing Computer Science for two semesters now and I am positive that is what I want to do. However, going into my 7th semester in college, I am exhausted. I took so many classes that don't even count toward my degree. I also took two breaks between semesters. Once between the 3rd and 4th semester and once between 4th and 5th. I sat out a semester each time. To be honest, I have 3 semesters to go to just get an AS in CS. This is because the courses have to be taken in sequence, so I have to take a few courses each semester instead of doubling up. To be honest, at this point I am tired of being in school altogther and I am frustrated at the length it is taking. I know it is my fault for rushing in. That is my point. If you piddle around college for a few semesters you will get tired of it. It is best to go in knowing what you want and taking as few semesters as possible to get it. If you feel that you must go, then take ONLY courses that definitely transfer to any major you might want to take. I am talking the basic english, math, science and history. If you are forced to take more classes at least take fun or usefull classes. That way if you decide to leave school, at least you learned something interesting or useful. I had a friend who never graduated in engineering, but took one course in CAD for fun. He has made a nice living off of that one class.