[NTLUG:Discuss] Linux certs vs "real-world" relevance

[bob e]

I used to be an STK service rep and I know that STK can be very UN-helpful.
We routinely removed resident diagnostic programs and essential maintenance
documentation when we discontinued our maintenance. There is a special key
code to put the unit in diagnostic mode, where you can do all sorts of neat
things..... if you can get hold of a maintenance manual. Bob Earhart

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Cox" <cjcox at acm.org>
To: <discuss at ntlug.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [NTLUG:Discuss] Linux certs vs "real-world" relevance


> jm wrote:
> >
> > As an alternative point of view in reference to the Certification
programs mentioned...
> >
> > The Cisco and MS certifications are older and more developed than any
Linux certification
> > program currently being developed.  And it is still an ongoing process,
without a complete
> > implementation that I'm aware of yet.  Little wonder there are more
requests for the better
> > known programs.  Just an additional component to take into
consideration, I think.
>
> I apologize if this is bit offtopic... but one thing I've discovered
working
> with
> various "higher end" vendors is that they often times build their
equipment
> around the "need" to have more training and certification.  One case in
point is
> the Storage Tek SVA unit I've been working with.  It has a local operator
panel
> (LOP)
> that IS NOT documented anywhere in their documentation.  I was on the
phone with
> one of their better experts and even he admitted that I probably knew more
about
> how to operate the unit that most... mainly from experimentation with the
device
> (a bit nervous expermenting with a $XXX,XXX device though).  Anyway, I
think
> that's
> a key differentiator between many of the Linux and other free and/or open
source
> solutions out there... they're (Linux,GNU,etc) not designing the stuff to
> "require" training
> and certification.
>
> I know there's a lot of material about Cisco out there... but could it be
that
> there's no concise how-to style documents and that is why training and
> certification
> are more important there ???   Something to think about.
>
> Of course the converse is Linux where there is a ton of helpful howtos
> (overwhelming
> I know).  And even though there is lots of documentation to sift
through... I
> think
> there is actually much less than some of the commerical offerings and the
> documentation
> tends to get more to the point of what you need to do.  This may "cheapen"
the
> value
> of certification/training in the case of Linux/GNU/etc.  It's not as
"needed".
>
> Just an observation,
> Chris
>
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > On Sun, 13 Jan 2002 18:29:51 -0500
> > falconjetflyer at netscape.net wrote:
> >
> > > Brian,  I  have also wondered the same thing, as I am interested in
being certified myself.  After looking at Monster.com and hotjobs.com I have
noticed  that experience is the most sought after requirment.   The few, and
I do mean few, that want certification asked for either MS or Cisco certs.
Red Hat seems to be the major player, and even if that is not true, RH is
the name best known to the lay or professional linux/Unix user.
> > > The RH method of linux seems to be close to many or most of the
distributions I have seen.   I must admit, I have 6 months of experience
with linux, and used Caldera and Mandrake and the many books and pubs I use
for reference refer to RH as a standard of sorts and the information is of
value.   Linux changes and improves so rapidly, that all references are out
of date as soon as they are published.
> > >
> > > If I were hiring, experience is most valuable, but for linux
administration RH cert would carry some weight, especially for an entry
level position.
> > >
> > > I am also an instructor, but in the aviation industry.
> > > Garion Sikora
> > >
> > > brian at pongonova.net wrote:
> > >
> > > >Please read the following *in its entirety* before hitting your 'r'
button after
> > > >the first paragraph!
> > > >
> > > >I am looking for some insights (personal anecdotes are certainly
welcome) as to the
> > > >relevance of the various Linux certifications (LPI, SAIR, SAGE, RHCE,
etc.) in the
> > > >"real world."  Some examples: Is more weight given to one cert over
another?  Do RH
> > > >shops consider the RH cert more valuable than the non-RH cert?  How
applicable is a
> > > >particular certification to the "real world"?
> > > >
> > > >URLs to pertinent sites comparing the different certs would be
welcome as well.
> > > >
> > > >**Please note, I'm not looking for a flame war here, nor am I looking
for a "which
> > > >one is best" solution.  Also, I'm not interested in the certification
vs.
> > > >experience debate.**
> > > >
> > > >My point-of-view is from an instructor standpoint (I teach Unix
courses at the
> > > >college level), trying to get a grasp on the high and low points of
each cert and
> > > >the level of correlation between different college-level Unix
curricula and various
> > > >certification objectives.  My working thesis is that if there's a
good fit between
> > > >a given cert's objectives and the "real world," I believe a good
indicator as
> > > >to how well a Unix program prepares a student for the "real world" is
how well the
> > > >Unix program covers the cert's objectives.
> > > >
> > > From what I can tell, most of the certs focus on network and
sysadmin-related
> > > >tasks, whereas my Unix background is mostly software development on
various Unix
> > > >platforms.  I don't have a good handle on how *applicable* each cert
is from a Unix
> > > >admin point of view, which is why your input will be valuable.
> > > >
> > > >Knowing this group, I'm certainly looking forward to your responses
:)
> > > >
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>