I took the first 4 exams (which qualify you as an lca) some time ago and must say that, compared to the microsoft and also novell tests, the matter you're tested on was pretty deep and covered almost everything I knew. (and then some:) )
Quetions vary from scenarios about what you can do with a certain piece of software which is gpl'd if you want to integrate it into your own project up to setting up firewalling rules using ipchains and what protocol dhcp runs on.
Overall I must say I even enjoyed taking these tests: they really felt like a challenge for a change.
You get 60 minutes per test and I can guarantee you: you'll need them. The 4th test (covering securtiy, privacyðics) was a bit of a dirty one though...
The point of some posters here is valid: most of us can get 80% plus on the practice tests which a re online. However, the exams are an entirely different matter. Know your stuff!
They have a lot of questions, for example, which include the answer: none of the above and all of the above. Also the infamous microsoft's 'choose all that apply' (without actually saying how many) are present. Overall, I'd say that you have to know what you're talking about, and also _understand_ it...Which is good, no?
Also, the people of the sair team are pretty good at answering you if you're having problems with something concerning the exams...I for myself wish them luck.
To give up after all...
Well, maybe not to give up upon creating a good browser, but does anyone feel, like me, that this is going a bit too far?
Linux on the desktop may not be there yet, but at least until some time ago we had a usable browser. However, with the many changes in web technology (yeah, standards, well let me tell you: standards are what most people use, not what's dictated) I too must now admit for some time that compared to IE on windows (and it must be stresses: yes, on windows only, but that's another matter) netscape 4 is bloated and featureless...
So what did I recommend a friend lately for use on his LInux desktop? Indeed...Mozilla...Boy, what a disappointment it was...
I mean, plugins either don't load or are a b*tch to install, some web sites do not display correctly, startup time is slow (after all this time...debugging code or not...), ssl requires a separate download, the mail client is pure shit, still no LDAP support, you get the picture.
Then Netscape killed the little reputation mozilla managed to make for itself by releasing NS6 release while it's somewhere more along the lines of pre-beta...
Doesn't anyone else feel that mozilla's development compared to what it achieved shows a rather low success ratio?
Is there really anyone out there, despite the zealotry, that would recommend deploying mozilla or NS6 to a few hundred workstations to his boss? How about within a few months? Not me...
I keep thinking that if all these unnecessary 'features' had been left out...We're getting into a dangerous situation here...This is yet one more open-source project that looks like it will fail miserably and with a high profile. And what the hell will we use as our browser in the future? Sure, it displays pure html code mostly fine, but what about those other 80 percent of the web that use plugins or extra features?
It seems to me that most people, in their anti-microsoft frenzy, have forgotten about what got this whole circus started, namely: MS uses its knowledge of the OS they created to get an unfair advantage towards competition, as well as forcing their applications down our throats. Not to mention the fact that they like to kill off competition by giving away their own products for free, since there are enough other products to make money off anyway... So, provided they are guilty, what is the solution? Having them open-source the OS? This actually has nothing to do with the problem. Will we force every company out there in the software business to open-source their products then? Breaking them up? That would keep them from providing the apps company that would result from getting information from the OS company? Regulating them? Hmpf. What about the 'keep the internet uncensored' cries? As much as I dislike MS, a solution should be found which is fair, ie which we wouldn't be afraid to apply to other products, including Linux. Besides, as far as I can recall most Linux distributions come with versions of Apache, sendmail, pop3, you-name-it servers. A compiler. Whatever. Okay, they're open-sourced. This arguably also hurts commercial apps. The open-source vs closed-source debate is, in my opinion, moot...The only thing that matters is quality code...If it's open, very good. If it's closed, too bad... And yes, I _do_ advocate Linux use and throw out NT servers whenever I can... It seems there's a difficult and long road ahead (pun intended:))) ) .
I think we'll all agree that the tech world evolves extremely rapid. For a company, keeping up-to-date costs heaps of money. Small wonder then that everyone is falling asleep over this trial. Strange that the DOJ doesn't seem to have taken this into account. Anyway, this could in theory have been settled quickly: 1) MS didn't have an internet policy to speak of, in fact, even tried to 'replace' it with their own MSN. (ridiculous as it sounds) 2) Netscape did have the correct amount of vision here and rose very fast among the hi-tech companies. 3) MS sees everything evolving, takes an existing product, puts on some fancy buttons and gives it away for free. (how's that for unprecedented) Now what would their motive have been here? The Netscape-AOL merger isn't proof of existing competition, it's a result of anti-competitive practices. The unethical business practices have been _here_, not afterwards... I mean, even installing an NT service pack gets you IE shoved down your throat nowadays...And which reasonable administrator puts a browser which has become so bloated on a critical server? (Although the time when Navigator fit on a single floppy is long behind us too now...)
Slashdot Mirror
That's not in MS Word... That's an add on.
So a bit like mouse gestures are a plug-in to firefox?
I took the first 4 exams (which qualify you as an lca) some time ago and must say that, compared to the microsoft and also novell tests, the matter you're tested on was pretty deep and covered almost everything I knew. (and then some :) )
Quetions vary from scenarios about what you can do with a certain piece of software which is gpl'd if you want to integrate it into your own project up to setting up firewalling rules using ipchains and what protocol dhcp runs on.
Overall I must say I even enjoyed taking these tests: they really felt like a challenge for a change.
You get 60 minutes per test and I can guarantee you: you'll need them. The 4th test (covering securtiy, privacyðics) was a bit of a dirty one though...
The point of some posters here is valid: most of us can get 80% plus on the practice tests which a re online. However, the exams are an entirely different matter. Know your stuff!
They have a lot of questions, for example, which include the answer: none of the above and all of the above. Also the infamous microsoft's 'choose all that apply' (without actually saying how many) are present. Overall, I'd say that you have to know what you're talking about, and also _understand_ it...Which is good, no?
Also, the people of the sair team are pretty good at answering you if you're having problems with something concerning the exams...I for myself wish them luck.
To give up after all...
Well, maybe not to give up upon creating a good browser, but does anyone feel, like me, that this is going a bit too far?
Linux on the desktop may not be there yet, but at least until some time ago we had a usable browser. However, with the many changes in web technology (yeah, standards, well let me tell you: standards are what most people use, not what's dictated) I too must now admit for some time that compared to IE on windows (and it must be stresses: yes, on windows only, but that's another matter) netscape 4 is bloated and featureless...
So what did I recommend a friend lately for use on his LInux desktop? Indeed...Mozilla...Boy, what a disappointment it was...
I mean, plugins either don't load or are a b*tch to install, some web sites do not display correctly, startup time is slow (after all this time...debugging code or not...), ssl requires a separate download, the mail client is pure shit, still no LDAP support, you get the picture.
Then Netscape killed the little reputation mozilla managed to make for itself by releasing NS6 release while it's somewhere more along the lines of pre-beta...
Doesn't anyone else feel that mozilla's development compared to what it achieved shows a rather low success ratio?
Is there really anyone out there, despite the zealotry, that would recommend deploying mozilla or NS6 to a few hundred workstations to his boss? How about within a few months? Not me...
I keep thinking that if all these unnecessary 'features' had been left out...We're getting into a dangerous situation here...This is yet one more open-source project that looks like it will fail miserably and with a high profile. And what the hell will we use as our browser in the future? Sure, it displays pure html code mostly fine, but what about those other 80 percent of the web that use plugins or extra features?
It seems to me that most people, in their anti-microsoft frenzy, have forgotten about what got this whole circus started, namely: MS uses its knowledge of the OS they created to get an unfair advantage towards competition, as well as forcing their applications down our throats. Not to mention the fact that they like to kill off competition by giving away their own products for free, since there are enough other products to make money off anyway... So, provided they are guilty, what is the solution? Having them open-source the OS? This actually has nothing to do with the problem. Will we force every company out there in the software business to open-source their products then? Breaking them up? That would keep them from providing the apps company that would result from getting information from the OS company? Regulating them? Hmpf. What about the 'keep the internet uncensored' cries? As much as I dislike MS, a solution should be found which is fair, ie which we wouldn't be afraid to apply to other products, including Linux. Besides, as far as I can recall most Linux distributions come with versions of Apache, sendmail, pop3, you-name-it servers. A compiler. Whatever. Okay, they're open-sourced. This arguably also hurts commercial apps. The open-source vs closed-source debate is, in my opinion, moot...The only thing that matters is quality code...If it's open, very good. If it's closed, too bad... And yes, I _do_ advocate Linux use and throw out NT servers whenever I can... It seems there's a difficult and long road ahead (pun intended :))) ) .
I think we'll all agree that the tech world evolves extremely rapid. For a company, keeping up-to-date costs heaps of money. Small wonder then that everyone is falling asleep over this trial. Strange that the DOJ doesn't seem to have taken this into account. Anyway, this could in theory have been settled quickly: 1) MS didn't have an internet policy to speak of, in fact, even tried to 'replace' it with their own MSN. (ridiculous as it sounds) 2) Netscape did have the correct amount of vision here and rose very fast among the hi-tech companies. 3) MS sees everything evolving, takes an existing product, puts on some fancy buttons and gives it away for free. (how's that for unprecedented) Now what would their motive have been here? The Netscape-AOL merger isn't proof of existing competition, it's a result of anti-competitive practices. The unethical business practices have been _here_, not afterwards... I mean, even installing an NT service pack gets you IE shoved down your throat nowadays...And which reasonable administrator puts a browser which has become so bloated on a critical server? (Although the time when Navigator fit on a single floppy is long behind us too now...)