Am 03. Nov, 2002 schwätzte Darrell Shandrow so:
> Yes! I'd certainly agree. I took such an A+ prep course (just as a
> brush-up) then took and passed the A+ exams with flying colors. There's
> absolutely no mention of Linux on the exam. As a student, I'd be a bit
> upset if I spent money to take a course going toward certification, then the
> instructor decided to include material known not to be covered by that
> particular certification. If that instructor wants to teach a certification
> course involving Linux, why not teach a prep course for Linux+?
Not trying to bag on you, but this attitude is why MCSEs should be limited
to washing dishes. Thus far my experience has been that anyone touting
having an m$ cert hasn't a clue. They don't know the technology just the
marketing-speak from m$.
A friend of mine quit teaching MCSE classes ( he was earning quite well and
had more business than he could do ) because he tired of not being allowed
to teach students what they needed to know to be good sys_adms. He was
only allowed ( often due primarily to time constraints ) to teach what was
covered by the exams, which don't cover what you really need to know.
I'm told the Cisco certs are good. I've never heard that any of the other
computer certifications are worth the dead tree they're written on. In fact,
quite the opposite.
SAGE claims to have valid certs:
www.sagecert.org. I don't know. I do know
the exams were written by highly qualified system administrators. Looks
like the m$ module isn't yet available, just core and UNIX.
ciao,
der.hans
--
# https://www.LuftHans.com/ http://www.TOLISGroup.com/
# Help Jerry Lewis stamp out M$...oops that's MDA - der.hans
(text/plain)