The LPI exams - are they more like MCSE (as in Sys Admin / Config) certifications ??
Rather than "development" as such ?? Or are there C & C++ exams for Linux ??
What's the deal with Kylix ? I heard some hype a while ago - about developing on Linux
Just wondering what sort of app's you might build - and whether there's some ADO.NET equivalent... (or would you use ODBC ?)
I just haven't really used Linux - I could count on one hand the number of times I've even
For cryin' out loud even a MS certification thread gets hijacked to talk about linux!!!??!!
I've been looking at doing an MCSD but I'm holding off for a month just to see if new editions of the training materials are coming soon. I don't want to waste my money on the current books if better ones are just around the corner.
I have to agree that the MCAD / MCSD really isn't worth the paper it's printed on. I will also say that I have both certs, being a Charter Member of the MCAD as well.
You're far better off in my opinion to get a Computer Science degree (Bachelors or Masters) than to get certified. One exception to this rule are those people who work for companies who want to become gold partners (or whatever its called) with Microsoft. I
think they require people to actually have the certs. Then, it's probably worth it for job security.
But to have a developer certification that doesn't require you to write code (just look at code), really isn't that valuable, IMHO.
I knew a guy who got an exchange server cert without ever touching exchange server.
He did a lot of travelling so just read the exam cram books on his train journeys, then passed the exam first time. Because of this and similar stories I pretty much ignore the whole certification process...
I just want more "bling" for my wall and I don't feel like trying to go back and get my master's degree yet. Especially since the company I work for wouldn't pay for the master's unless it was directly applicable to our business (understandable) plus
make me stay another 3 years after I'm done (not gonna happen). (I already have my BS in CS)
It all depends on how you look at it. I am currently studying for 316 and using Kalanis book. I work through all the examples on VS and have learned loads. I already have a degree in computing and am employed as a developer using pre .NET MS technologies.
Just because some people cheat or do the bare minimum doesnt make the cert worthless. Plenty of companies would look on it favourably if accompanied by a degree and some experience.
I've been told over and over, Experience trumps certs. But, certs can't hurt if you've also got experience. HR and IT recruiters like to see experience, and if they see exp and certs, they will probably beleive the certs mean something. If they just see
certs, they may smell something fishy.
I'd like to try for the certs... and am working through the books now.
... people who work for companies who want to become gold partners (or whatever its called) with Microsoft. I think they require people to actually have the certs...
Yep - the way a company gets a Microsoft Partnership is by how many cert'ed people they have.
I see no new MCAD/MCSD core kit standing there yet. Maby there is no core kit anymore with the new program, I dunno.
Me just got the MCAD/MCSD pack for .NET 1.1 second handed, but planning on taking .NET 2.0 exams. But with this I am able to start today and then learn a few new bits later on.
A programmer doesn't need a MCAD or MCSD degree to show others how good he or she really is. It's all in the way you work.
1.) Be trustworthy
2.) Be ambitious
3.) Though programming is complicated now, always throw a little humour around with you and the client.
4.) Always suggest new ideas to make the application better. (Applies to 5).
5.) Be innovative
Do the above and to me you've already got and MCAD certification.
I'm interested to know how many people have completed any of the Microsoft exams/certifications ?
I've got about 12 down (on the .net side I've only taken the C# Web and C# Windows exams) but no qualification as such. I think at one point I worked out that if I just took three more exams I'd be an MCSE, and MCSD and an MCDBA, but I couldn't be bothered.
I didn't take the exams to earn qualifications.
On their own I think the qualifications are close to worthless. The exams themselves test if you can "learn by rote" and that's about it. I've passed each one with a good score on first pass. To pass one you just need to swot for a week and then 4 weeks later
if you took the same test again you'd probably fail.
What the STUDY MATERIAL for the exams IS good for is getting you a broad overview of a new subject. Most of the training kits are a good way of getting into a new subject, and I take the exams as a sort of self-test to see if I've understood the broad concepts.
When interviewing the only interest I have in candidates who have the qualifications is if they've done them in their own time and at their own expense - that indicates someone quite passionate about their work and prepared to "go the extra mile". Experience
is what counts but if I had two "equal" candidates and one had MCAD/MCSD done in their own time and the other didn't I'd probably take the one with the MCAD/MCSD.
Well my view is as follows.
When you can learn and pass an exam parrot fashion it's worthless.
When a "qualification" is used to garner marketing money and gold partner status, as opposed to furthering your employee's knowledge it's worthless.
When a "qualification" can be canceled by new exam availability it's worthless.
Work wants us qualified for marketing reasons. I have no problem with that, as long as I don't have to do it in my own time. The exams don't offer me any benefits, so if it's important to the company to get me qualified, send me on a boot camp for a week.
This is not the most popular opinion, but I had a lot of fun arguing it when interviewing at Avanade (ah, the joy you can have in an interview when you've already decided there's no way to want to work somewhere)
I'll add my 2 cents...
Vendor certifications are worthless. If you already have and ABET accredited degree (which I consider a must for working in development) get your PE licence from the government.
I've never met someone who had a vendor certification that I considered a competent developer, and I've never met someone who had a PE licence I didn't consider excellent. And I've worked alongside plenty of developers.
Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.