The MCSA seems to be a nice middle cert between Network+ and the MCSE. With the Net+ exam, you learn broad networking terms and methodologies, whereas with the MCSE, you apply those methodologies to a Windows environment. I think that the MCSA will probably be a pretty big hit. I also like the new MCAD cert track. I am definitely interested in that one. The MCAD is targeted towards enterprise application developers, but covers Web-related programming. I am also interested in the new .NET programming exams. I have heard that VB .NET and C# .NET use pretty much the same foundation; just the syntax is different.
I'm with ya TigerBait....
I got my Engineer in Training (EIT) and will take the Professional Engineer Exam (PE) in a few months.
BTW IMHO - Sorry for all you MCSE's out there, but technically you don't have a right to call yourselves an engineer. You know software better than anyone and I respect you for it, but believe me that ain't engineering. When you survive 4-5 or in my case 7 years of engineering school then take personal responsibility for the public welfare, you can claim the name, until then, I'd feel much better if the "E" stood for EXPERT and not engineer.
I got my Engineer in Training (EIT) and will take the Professional Engineer Exam (PE) in a few months.
BTW IMHO - Sorry for all you MCSE's out there, but technically you don't have a right to call yourselves an engineer. You know software better than anyone and I respect you for it, but believe me that ain't engineering. When you survive 4-5 or in my case 7 years of engineering school then take personal responsibility for the public welfare, you can claim the name, until then, I'd feel much better if the "E" stood for EXPERT and not engineer.
Not to stir up trouble, but if there were only one firm definition for engineer, the people that work on trains should be pissed at both of our groups. Multiple definitions exist for a great number of words. What's next? Will a group be upset that a Systems Expert/Engineer shouldn't be a Systems Expert at all (because the group decided that the only definition for 'systems' should have only one strict definition) but should actually be a Computer Networking and Windows Expert?
A Systems/Network-Engineer/Administrator-whatever-you-want-to-call-it does a specific job that should in no way be misunderstood with the job performed by Engineers. Honestly, when have any of you ever heard of the two professions being confused because of a certification name? After all, the full title is "Systems Engineer", not "Engineer" or "Electrical Engineer" or "Automotive Engineer" or "Structural Engineer" or, strangely enough, "Financial Engineer".
So, let's say that I have no "right" to call myself an "Engineer" of any sort. Then, by that logic, should medical doctors be upset that a Doctor of Music carries the same "Doctor" title? How dare they! After all, they can't save lives like a "real doctor". Carrying the logic even further, can I not call myself an Operations Analyst or a Intelligence Analyst (both positions I have held) simply because I have taken no Analysis classes?
It's just words, people. Don't get bent out of shape over them.
I know you feel strongly about -your- title, but it's not like the world will end because Microsoft decided they want to call us by the title "Systems Engineer". And it's not like MCSE's are looking to take your jobs away from you! (heh, though some may need the money nowadays!)
But, as usual, this is simply a Random opinion.
A Systems/Network-Engineer/Administrator-whatever-you-want-to-call-it does a specific job that should in no way be misunderstood with the job performed by Engineers. Honestly, when have any of you ever heard of the two professions being confused because of a certification name? After all, the full title is "Systems Engineer", not "Engineer" or "Electrical Engineer" or "Automotive Engineer" or "Structural Engineer" or, strangely enough, "Financial Engineer".
So, let's say that I have no "right" to call myself an "Engineer" of any sort. Then, by that logic, should medical doctors be upset that a Doctor of Music carries the same "Doctor" title? How dare they! After all, they can't save lives like a "real doctor". Carrying the logic even further, can I not call myself an Operations Analyst or a Intelligence Analyst (both positions I have held) simply because I have taken no Analysis classes?
It's just words, people. Don't get bent out of shape over them.
I know you feel strongly about -your- title, but it's not like the world will end because Microsoft decided they want to call us by the title "Systems Engineer". And it's not like MCSE's are looking to take your jobs away from you! (heh, though some may need the money nowadays!) But, as usual, this is simply a Random opinion.
ErmanC--
The term "engineer" has several different meanings. For example:
from dictionary.com:
ENGINEER
One who is trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering.
AND
One who skillfully or shrewdly manages an enterprise.
And, there are more definitions of an engineer. As you can see, the concept of engineering goes well beyond the scope of mechanical, electrical or civil engineering. Because I didn't go to school for 4 (or 7 in your case) years to go to work as a mechanical, electrical or civil engineer (although I did take "real" engineering classes when I was in college) doesn't make me any less of a "systems engineer." A family member of mine works as a professional engineer, but he doesn't have a "real" engineering degree. Does this make him any less of an engineer? In fact, he worked as a vice president of engineering for a manufacturing firm; he is an expert in mechanical AND in electrical engineering and he taught himself. Given your strict definition of engineer where you MUST go to school for at least 4 years, he would not be considered an engineer. However, companies from all over the world relied on his opinion. He hired an engineer who had a master's degree in electrical engineering from Georgia Tech, who by your definition would be considered to be a "real" engineer." However, when presented with a real world problem, he was unable to solve it. The same applies to IT professionals. A person with an MCSE who doesn't know how to format a floppy is not a systems engineer, although Microsoft calls them that. That person is no more an engineer than a person with a "real" engineering degree who doesn't know how to solve simple engineering problems. The point is that an "engineer" is more than a degree. An engineer is someone who "skillfully...manages an enterprise." As a network administrator, I was responsible for all of the information management for the company. I had to "engineer" the flow of information. Is that not similar to what a mechanical engineer does. A mechanical engineer "engineers" the construction of metal. An electrical engineer "engineers" the flow of electricity. A financial engineer "engineers" the flow of money. They are all engineers, even if they didn't go to school for seven years in the "engineering" department of a university.
The term "engineer" has several different meanings. For example:
from dictionary.com:
ENGINEER
One who is trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering.
AND
One who skillfully or shrewdly manages an enterprise.
And, there are more definitions of an engineer. As you can see, the concept of engineering goes well beyond the scope of mechanical, electrical or civil engineering. Because I didn't go to school for 4 (or 7 in your case) years to go to work as a mechanical, electrical or civil engineer (although I did take "real" engineering classes when I was in college) doesn't make me any less of a "systems engineer." A family member of mine works as a professional engineer, but he doesn't have a "real" engineering degree. Does this make him any less of an engineer? In fact, he worked as a vice president of engineering for a manufacturing firm; he is an expert in mechanical AND in electrical engineering and he taught himself. Given your strict definition of engineer where you MUST go to school for at least 4 years, he would not be considered an engineer. However, companies from all over the world relied on his opinion. He hired an engineer who had a master's degree in electrical engineering from Georgia Tech, who by your definition would be considered to be a "real" engineer." However, when presented with a real world problem, he was unable to solve it. The same applies to IT professionals. A person with an MCSE who doesn't know how to format a floppy is not a systems engineer, although Microsoft calls them that. That person is no more an engineer than a person with a "real" engineering degree who doesn't know how to solve simple engineering problems. The point is that an "engineer" is more than a degree. An engineer is someone who "skillfully...manages an enterprise." As a network administrator, I was responsible for all of the information management for the company. I had to "engineer" the flow of information. Is that not similar to what a mechanical engineer does. A mechanical engineer "engineers" the construction of metal. An electrical engineer "engineers" the flow of electricity. A financial engineer "engineers" the flow of money. They are all engineers, even if they didn't go to school for seven years in the "engineering" department of a university.
On a subject related to certifications, based on AU Tiger's comment that his company gives bonuses for certifications: What have your experiences been regarding bonuses or raises based on certifications? In my past experience, once a company had hired me, they were reluctant to part with any great deal of money, although promises were made when I was hired. However, other companies were happy to (initially) pay me much more for my newly gained certifications along with the experience I had acquired. Therefore, ALL of my raises for the past four years have come about by voluntarily switching employment.
There is a side-effect to that, however: short stints of employment tend to brand you as a job-hopper. But, hey, when you've been with a company for a few months and another company offers you $10,000 a year more than your present employer... what would YOU do? That happened to me not once, but twice. However, I almost didn't get my present job because of the perceived "job-hopping."
My present employer is great; while they don't specifically pay for attaining certifications, they do notice when an employee is acquiring them and will compensate them for it during their yearly review, for the most part. All I ask of a company is that they're honest with me and justly reward me for merit/achievement/effort. So, I think I'll stick with the job I have for a while.
Before anyone asks: No, I'm not one of those making close to, at, or above the "regional average" of $65,000 for an MCSE+I with 4 years of experience. From the technicians I know, those salaries just don't exist. Which brings up another interesting question: where the heck DOES MCP Magazine get these salary figures?
There is a side-effect to that, however: short stints of employment tend to brand you as a job-hopper. But, hey, when you've been with a company for a few months and another company offers you $10,000 a year more than your present employer... what would YOU do? That happened to me not once, but twice. However, I almost didn't get my present job because of the perceived "job-hopping."
My present employer is great; while they don't specifically pay for attaining certifications, they do notice when an employee is acquiring them and will compensate them for it during their yearly review, for the most part. All I ask of a company is that they're honest with me and justly reward me for merit/achievement/effort. So, I think I'll stick with the job I have for a while.
Before anyone asks: No, I'm not one of those making close to, at, or above the "regional average" of $65,000 for an MCSE+I with 4 years of experience. From the technicians I know, those salaries just don't exist. Which brings up another interesting question: where the heck DOES MCP Magazine get these salary figures?
first of all, the certifications one pursues depends on where they want to go in their life.
as for me, i have my MCSE+I (Microsoft - NT4), CCNA (Cisco), CCSA (Checkpoint). i'll probably get more into the unix side of things because i'm pretty sick and tired of microsoft. as citrix said, that test is pretty easy, and i might just do it for the hell of it (esp. if they mail the free test voucher). i see myself doing the sun solaris sometime soon (SCSA, SCNA) and maybe something to tie everything i learn up till that point (CISSP).
what are you interested in doing? there has been a lot of talk of windows 2000/xp and that might not be such a bad thing if that's what you like to do.
one thing i learn is not to tie yourself too closely to any one vender. good luck to all of you.
as for me, i have my MCSE+I (Microsoft - NT4), CCNA (Cisco), CCSA (Checkpoint). i'll probably get more into the unix side of things because i'm pretty sick and tired of microsoft. as citrix said, that test is pretty easy, and i might just do it for the hell of it (esp. if they mail the free test voucher). i see myself doing the sun solaris sometime soon (SCSA, SCNA) and maybe something to tie everything i learn up till that point (CISSP).
what are you interested in doing? there has been a lot of talk of windows 2000/xp and that might not be such a bad thing if that's what you like to do.
one thing i learn is not to tie yourself too closely to any one vender. good luck to all of you.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter