Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
Another possibility is that I want to take this time to get some M$ certificates, such as MCAD, MCDBA. Could you please comment how are the certificates compared with several months' working experience?
As far as MicroSuck certs go, here's my opinion of them... Stay Away (unless the company is paying), get UNIX certified, Cisco, Net +, A +, basically stuff that won't be worthless in a year when Micr$oft releases their next greatest brainfart.
MS certs are a good waste of thousands of dollars because according to the powers that be, the knowledge you gained with your 2000 MCSE cert is 100% worthless with 2003.
That's got to be one of the most uninformed posts I've seen in a while (on several levels, the most important of which is bolded, below). I'm not sure what power you're speaking of, but if you honestly think that learning Windows 2000 Server doesn't prepare you to learn Windows Server 2003, you're quite mistaken. That's like saying that you learn nothing about Windows XP Home by first learning Windows 98 - complete balderdash. One has its roots in the other. The operating systems are similar, at their cores. In fact, when I was learning about Linux, I was amazed at how little I needed to learn due to some core, shared fundamental concepts.
The EXAMS might be somewhat different... but one would hope that you're not taking exams just to get money. One would hope that you are attempting to further your career
by gaining knowledge, then simply validating that knowledge by passing exams (and becoming certified).
Additionally, if you're only able to support clients that use Windows Server 2003, you've just cut out the majority of your client base, who don't yet use Windows Server 2003.
And, finally, and most importantly, the OP was speaking of the MCAD and MCDBA, not about the MCSE certifications. OS (2K vs 2003) is largely a moot point as far as programming certs are concerned, is it not? And what would a programmer gain by getting "UNIX certified, Cisco, Net +, A +"? Sounds like you just wanted to let your personal feelings about Microsoft vent out a little bit without carefuly reading the OP.
Now, to answer the OP's question: Experience beats certifications, hands down, every time. However, that doesn't mean that certifications are worthless. They simply show that you have achieved a benchmark level of skill with that technology. If you and your competition has the same level of skill, all things being equal, except one of you is certified and the other is not, guess who I'm going to consider hiring? Granted, it's easier to show someone some code than to show someone you know how to administer a network without the requisite certification to back you up... but at the VERY least, the employer knows you took the initiative to take the exams. As someone who has interviewed and reviewed people, let me tell you: initiative counts for a LOT.
My answer to you: do both, if you possibly can (experience + certs). While getting experience by working, get certified (especially if your employer pays for it). Go for whatever certifications thrill you (because if you're not doing what you enjoy, it's not worth it). If you like programming for MS-based OSes, go for the MCAD and MCSD. If you like database administration, go for the MCDBA or Oracle (OCA, OCP) certifications. But, for now, focus on a single path. If you don't enjoy it, change paths.
I hope this helps. If I can provide any further advice, shoot me a PM. I'd be happy to help. Plus, I've got quite a few programmer friends who are in or have recently been in the same situation as you find yourself in.