MCSE 2K/XP for the IT professionals, your thoughts.

[tim0thy]

I wasn't sure where to put this message, in Operating Systems, or here in Off-Topic, but I'm sure the mods will move it to the appropriate place if I guessed wrong.

Looking for some professional IT opinions here. I've been in the IT industry for quite a bit and with the new year, my MCSE+I has since "expired" and was wondering if I should even bother with 2000/XP. I say this because Microsoft has their Windows 2000 and XP under the same certification track and their next OS, slated to be released in late 2002 or whenever 2003 (codename Blackthorn, I believe).

Not for nothing, but I don't want to support a product where they will be releasing something "new" every year or two. I can't possibly suggest to my clients nor my employers to upgrade everytime the latest and greatest (*cough* bull *cough*) Windows comes out. Or are they going to allow for people to take an accelerated test where 95% of people fail to upgrade their Windows 2000/XP certification to Windows 2002. Of course, you can argue that there were a lot of paper MCSE and they needed to weed out the real techical people from the braindumpers.

NT4 was around a good 6 years and it was long overdue for a new upgrade. My take on 2000/XP is that it's just a stepping stone to something bigger of Microsoft. Or has Microsoft become exceedingly greedy or allowed their marketing run their technical operations?

At this rate, I'm going to go concentrate on Solaris instead or Cisco. I believe Microsoft ticked off a lot of their own certified IT professionals. I'm not even sure they have a clear path on what they want for the future.

Was wondering how the rest of you felt.

tim0thy - CCSA, CCNA, MCSE+I

 

[SQL]

I'm somewhat in the same boat.

My 3.51 MCSE has long since expired. Haven't been too concerned with it, since the whole MSCE program has been diluted and lost value by thousands who can barely format a disk.

Microsoft ticked me off some with how they handled they 2K thing. NT4 had an upgrade track. NT3.51 really didn't have an upgrade path to go to 2K. And how much different was NT4 from 3.51? Just the interface basically.

Someday I'll get off my duff and recertify. Of course now the tests will be $125.

 

[sitka]

I let mine run out, or renamed according to microsoft. But the guys at work got me into scripting and that lead to SQL experience so for now it looks like .Net certification is the way to go.
I wish they would make up my mind. I'm sick of being handed tasks I'm unqualified for because I'm the only guy out of 500 who can barely program. They gave me an office though and lots got layed off but it would be nice to get really good at 'one' something.

 

[Daniel]

I didn't renew my nt4 mcse, I did know people that were exactly what everyone described... total braindump readers that didn't have the first clue about what to do with a computer, it took me awhile to get mine with lots of labwork, studying and practice and these people bugged the hell out of me.

I'm currently planning on going the cisco route, the mcsa looks to be at least more useful for what I do, if I have the time or are offered the training maybe I'll go that route later but right now I'm not jumping at any of ms's offerings.

 

[tim0thy]

I cannot believe there are only 3 IT professionals in all of AT.

It's not even so much the recertification process, I can handle that. I just don't understand what's the point, if Microsoft is coming out with yet another operating system in the VERY near future, what's the point. At least with the recertification process with Cisco, the material is more or less the same when you do recertify. Even with Solaris, it's still more or less the same. Granted, OpenWindows will be phased out in Solaris 9, and GNOME added but that's minor. With this Microsoft nonsense, it's entirely different. They changed the operating system, directory structure, everything. So you have to learn EVERYTHING pretty much from scratch. Maybe I'm getting old (or tired), but I don't want to relearn how to do things every 2 or 3 years.

I'm not even sure they are keeping Active directory. The way they implement active directory is almost as if you better get it right the first time... else you are f'ed because you can't modify the highest level OUs. Supposedly Windows 2002 is supposed to address that (or whatever OS they decide to release).

SQL, I can't speak for Windows NT 3.51, it's a bit before my time, although I have messed around with Windows NT 3.0... that was fun. haha

 

[sitka]

How are the Cisco simulators these days? Tried that 'boson' one a long time ago it was real neat.

 

[Namlemez]

I think with the classes that stuff knowledge into people, the degree has become less and less meaningful. Taking to some higher level IT people, MCSEs can fairly often know extremely little, even stuff they were expected to learn. Basically its like college. You can get through, but you won't remember anything I think its almost becoming like A+, which is nice if you want to get your foot in the door, but only really proves you're a lowl level tech monkey.

 

[wiredspider]

I thought it was called blackcomb, it's suppose to be like a the name of a mountain or something like that.

 

[Saltin]

Im happy with my 2k MCSE. Businesses that were/are on NT 4 are finally moving to 2k, and I'm always amazed at how little alot of so called "Microsoft Guys" know about 2k. Most of the NT 4 guys I know (and I am generalizing) don't understand 2k fully. I make it my business to learn the server side of things inside out (AD, DNS, Exchange 2k, ISA) and I am still learning everyday. I think there is a decent amount of work for guys that know their stuff in 2000. My experience with XP is mainly lab stuff, we have it at work, but don't use it in production yet. I find it very similar to 2k (almost identical).
So, I would not say the cert is worthless, there is a need for 2k centric guys. You just better know your stuff. Know it well. Know how to roll out and know how to upgrade (tricky!). The work will come.

 

You have Cisco certs, why are you worrying about Microsoft? Continue in that direction. Or learn how to admin *nix environment.
As a indiviual, a unix admin is worth much more then an Nt admin.

But anyway, the 2000 server suite will not be replaced for sometime. It should have the life expectancy of nt4 or so.
XP is just a client software, should not take you more then a day to learn its ins and outs.
The accelerated test is hard and unless you know 2k well is probably a waste of your money and confidence.



<< Of course, you can argue that there were a lot of paper MCSE and they needed to weed out the real techical people from the braindumpers. >>


Very true.

 

[tim0thy]

<< You have Cisco certs, why are you worrying about Microsoft? Continue in that direction. Or learn how to admin *nix environment.
As a indiviual, a unix admin is worth much more then an Nt admin.

But anyway, the 2000 server suite will not be replaced for sometime. It should have the life expectancy of nt4 or so.
XP is just a client software, should not take you more then a day to learn its ins and outs.
The accelerated test is hard and unless you know 2k well is probably a waste of your money and confidence. >>



i worry about microsoft because i'm one of those people that wants to know everything about anything. and i figure since i have NT4 under my belt, why not just go up to 2000. i agree that XP is just client software, but what about the .net enterprise suite of software slated to replace windows 2000 servers?

and damn straight the accelerated test is hard. i took it and join the probably 95% of people who failed it. sometime i wish i don't have to work so much so i can actually study for it more.

but then, work sent me away to take unix courses. maybe my problem is that i have too much information, but i always figure more info is better than less.

edit: minor spelling mistakes.