What are the possibilites of employment for CISCO certified, for example if I decide to take CCNA and try to get a job based only on that cert. I have to point out that I do not have any registered experience.
Thank You.
PS. I`m 28y old, is it possible that professional reorientation at this age is too late, in this sector more exact?
Retraining at 28 aint the problem, I retrained in IT from an elecronics background at about the same age. The main issue is not having real world experience, and employers will always look at that over certification. What I found was that with the certification I could get an interview, but not the job, so I took some fairly junior positions to gain the required experience and knowledge that the exams can't provide. I also made a big deal of my experience as a field engineer that provided me with customer facing skills, this is something that no exam can teach and if you are good at it then point it out.
Hope that helps.
JV
It should be noted that a certification is a good way to learn, and is primarily a way to enhance existing experience. One should not depend on certifications as the sole marker of one's abilities if one wishes to gain meaningful employment. You have to gain experience from the bottom up, like in any other industry (think of how a lawyer progresses to being a senior partner; they start as an associate working 80 hour weeks, and work their way up)
Wow. I am 47 years old, I have been in the IT business for over 25 years. I have managed global networks, I have managed groups of programmers, and WAN engineers, and I have designed LAN/WAN configurations from the ground up....18 months ago I lost my job in IT.
I have been on dozens of IT interviews, and the thing that I get stuck with the most, is I have no certs and no college degree. So I have been collecting certs...started with a few from Comptia, and I take my CCNA exam tomorrow...I also have about 18 months left to complete my degree in IT Managemnt. It's never too late.
I wish I was 28 again.
IT is a tough world. If I was in your shoes right now, I would get a degree in some health related service and spend the next 20 years taking care of the baby boomers. Radiology is wide open, imaging techs are paid out the wazoo...but it is not easy (what is?).
Never too old to learn.here is something about me: There is a very good sentence:you will never be too old to learn.Today my wife told me that I should find a job as soon as possible, because it is too difficult to get a job if I was too old, as you know you are getting old. So now I really begin to doubt that good sentence.
I did a volunteer job at Oxfam. What I do is to assemble desktop computers,it's so easy for me.At the break time,I made a small talk with someone,and felt better than before,which is not too bad.
Assembling PC is so easy for me,but the important thing which I must overcome is the language barrier,I must try my best to get my English improved,it's the big deal.Three months staying at home doing nothing,I feel very bored now,so I make the plan as the following:
Try to find a work which doesn't need more communication,such as cleaner or deliverer;During seeking and doing this temporary job, I have to study hard to get a CISCO CCNP certification and get a good command of English.Then I can get a good job and good salary.When?I don't know.
Didn't work hard and got a good performance, I wasted a lot of precious time in the past.now,I do regret it,I worked as an engineer in IT field in my country.Yes, I got a good job and salary,but now everything is changed.I don't know what can I do and what I what to do.
However I do have a dream just as somebody else,and to be an expert in IT field is the thing I do want to do,but I am wondering that if it's never too old to learn.
I beg to differ, Mike. Certifications are NOT a learning tool. Certifications are to REINFORCE one's experience and knowledge of the systems, or equipment that they're working on. When you make a statement like that, you're opening up the field for everyone and anyone that wants to LEARN about IT to just take a chance at learning it. When that is the case, most people choose to learn the wrong way. People that have not invested, into the industry, a significant amount of time, prior to investigating certifications, tend to not care if they degrade those certifications. They more often than not go straight for the braindumps and don't care if their certifications are worth anything.
Some useful links:
Home:
-- CertGuard
Well, I beg to differ with you. What you described is the idea of certs, but not the reality. The reason that people go for the brain dumps is that is what the current testing methods encourage. I've explained to you before that the fix is not to criticize the end user, but to fix the tests so that they better test abilities to do the job rather than to remember odd facts that many people would use resources for anyway in the real world.
What do you think the certification training books are that come out from Cisco and Microsoft, other than glorified brain dumps?
The current certificaiton methods are what encourage people to learn the wrong way, not the brain dumps. The brain dumps are just a symptom of how disfunctional the testing process is.
But, I do agree with Mike, Certs are a good way to enhance your existing experience. Note that he did mention that the experience is important. But, I think that many who are experienced and later going back for the certs (like myself) will find that they are filling in gaps of information that they otherwise will not have learned. So, yes, it does reinforce what you know, but it also enchances your knowledge base as well. Mike's analogy was right on.
I'm not here to argue with you, or anyone else, about this. All I'm stating is that people looking to get into the IT Industry should not look towards certifications for 'a way in'. They either need some solid, hands-on, training, or they need to have a good working knowledge of the systems or equipment they want to certify on. Education is the key for everyone, not just the Certification Vendors. The Vendors are working on other possibilities, so why can't the 'end users'?
As for those 'glorified braindumps' you speak of, it sounds like you're not fully understanding the meaning of the word braindump. Braindumps are: "Questions and Answers taken from exams or other tests that have been copyrighted for purposes of protecting Confidential or Trade Secret Information and distributed for purposes of cheating or profit." Those Official Publications were not created to help people cheat on exams, nor have they ever been a part of an exam. They were, however, created to help people reinforce their knowledge of the systems and/or equipment they are working with and testing on.
I would like to hear how the current testing/certification methods _encourage_ the use of braindumps. If what you say is true, then maybe I can talk with people I know and have the issue resolved, or at least looked at.
Hmmm, maybe you should go back and read what you responded to. Mike was pretty clear about Certs not being the only means. And, I would say that you were argumentative.
I know perfectly well what a brain dump is. But, my point is that I've seen questions in "official" certification guides that are closer to real test questions than I've seen elsewhere. And, these guides often don't focus on learning, they focus on passing the test. If you think otherwise, then you haven't spent a whole lot of time reading these guides.
What encourages brain dumps is that the tests mostly test the ability to remember certain facts - ones that many professionals don't even remember and would use references to find out. Who cares what the 5 steps to accomplish this task, or troubleshooting that are? The tests need to be more real world. I've told you this before. The CCIE tests are more what I'm speaking about - much harder and proctored, but working on real equipment. Maybe not quite that difficult for more entry level stuff, but the model can be learned from.
Regardless, Mike's initial statement "It should be noted that a certification is a good way to learn," is what I was disagreeing with and I will continue to stand by my statement that Certifications are not to be used to gain entrance into a field that you have no knowledge about. Certifications were designed to give the IT Professional with a significant background the ability to show his employers/clients that he has the knowledge and experience to perform certain tasks.
Ok, then you should have elaborated on your previous statement. Because what you just said doesn't justify the Official Publication being called a 'glorified braindump'. The Official Publications have the authority to present the material in that manner, braindumps don't. Often the same Certified Trainers have input on both the Exam and the Official Test Prep Materials. Not to mention the fact that the Official Publications have historically been a lesser quality than the other's for the simple fact that they are the FIRST to have the information published. The writers of the subsequent publications have more than likely reviewed the original material at one point or another and have picked out any flaws.
Although I do agree that the tests should be more 'real world', I still don't see how all of this *encourages* people to break the law by stealing the material.
Being an MCSE, I'm sure you're aware that all of the Microsoft Exams are 'proctored'. In fact, Cisco uses the same exact proctors in the testing centers that Microsoft does (with a few exceptions, I'm sure).
Therefore, the quality of proctorship is directly proportional to the quality of the testing center they are employed by. But, that does not mean the Certification Vendors are liable for braindumps. Microsoft and Cisco have both been working on increasing the complexity of their exams, that much is obvious. But the first line of defense, when it comes to Exam Security lies with the Testing Centers that pay their proctors very little to watch people take exams.
Another statement that I stand by is "Everyone needs to be educated (criticized, critiqued, etc.), not just the Certification Vendors".
-- CertGuard
Studying for Certification tests IS a good way to learn. Leave it at that and don't extrapolate into something he didn't say. Mike clearly qualified that experience is important.
Besides, what is wrong with getting the certs before an actual job. Sure, the experience is much more important in my opinion. But, if you can pass the test, why not do it? See, now the tests should be hard enough that you can't pass without some real hands on experience, but I've already said that, haven't I? Certs are devalued because of this. Got nothing to do with brain dumps.
Whatever, not worth debating the sematics of these middle issues
Break the law? I'm not sure about that, but it is breaking the agreement you have. I will maintain that if they make the tests easy enough to pass without real world experience and focus more on memorizing than actually learning, this is what you will get. Don't get me wrong, I'm not encouraging braindumps. But, if one passes the test by brain dumps and one passes by reading the Cisco/Microsoft official guide, but neither can actually do the job, what's the difference? That is where the devaluing comes in. You can blame it on brain dumps all day long, but that is not the true problem with certs.
I mentioned this before, but I actually didn't value certifications long before brain dumps were a thing. They just plain don't test your ability to do the job. I can't speak for all certs, but having sat for a bunch of Novell, Microsoft and Cisco tests, I would say that is the case with them. I've hired contractors with certifications (before brain dumps) that were clueless and made me wonder how they could have been certified.
Not even close to the same thing. Read up on what the CCIE testing environment is like. I don't call the people sitting at the desk in Vue and Prometric centers real proctors.
Agreed. What have you been doing with the vendors to improve the situation? You spend a lot of time on the boards sending people to your web site, but I've never seen anything that indicates you have any approach other than getting rid of brain dumps.
I will not leave it at that. As I stated before, regardless of what Mike said in addition to "It should be noted that a certification is a good way to learn," he STILL said it, and it is still incorrect.
Now, let me paraphrase for you, "...have ACHIEVED...", past tense. Certifications were designed to show your clients/employers that you HAVE the necessary skills, not that you're learning them. It's the people that promote that method of obtaining certifications that are the problem, not the Vendors or how their tests are designed. Well, not completely, I do still agree that they need better structure. But if more people would just understand that certifications are NOT a learning tool, then there would be fewer 'tools' out there looking for certifications. Which would lessen the chances of people using braindumps, and further lessen the number of people stealing them.
What do you mean "what is wrong with getting the certs before an actual job."? C'mon, you're smarter than that. It defeats the purpose...the meaning...behind actually having a certification. That, right there, is a good portion of the drop in the value of certifications. I have not disagreed that the tests need to be more difficult, so why are you trying to shove it in my face like I'm wrong and you're right? We're on the same side here, we just have different views. And you can't seriously be sitting there trying to tell me that braindumps have absolutely nothing to do with the value of IT Certifications. Seriously? "Got nothing to do with brain dumps." I refuse to believe you're being serious.
Testking has given hundreds of thousands of individuals a means to cheat and enter the industry by way of braindumps. With the vast majority of those individuals being in China and India, why do you think the "outsourcing boom" happened when it did? Why do you think the Chinese are "out certifying" Americans 10:1? Yes, 10 to 1, it's documented.
The problem you see on the surface is much deeper than you think it is. Look at it like an iceberg. You're only seeing 10%, the other 90% is what we're trying to uncover.
Precisely what I've been getting at this entire time...EXPERIENCE. There is no room in the Industry anymore for "Paper Certs".
And yes, "break the law", Copyright infringement is a criminal/civil offense, and depending on the state you're in, could cost a lot of money and/or jail time. It has been proven in courts of law in (I'm guessing) every State of the Union and probably in many provinces in Canada. Major record labels have proven it, major production companies have proven it, and oh yeah Microsoft has proven it.
Yet you have certifications and you continue to promote their use and incorporation into the industry? I know people that feel the same way you do, but they _refuse_ to hire anyone based on the fact that they have certifications, and in fact, if a person says they have a certification, that person has to do even MORE now to try to get the job.
I'll have to take your word for it, since nobody else it chiming in to say anything different, and because I'm not familiar with the CCIE Testing environment.
I don't consider them 'real proctors' either, they're more like overpaid sweatshop workers. They don't care one way or the other if, or how, anyone passes a test. They're there to make their minimum wage and go party at the end of the day.
You have to understand that what you see in public is what we can (or choose to) provide you. Our goals are to increase "Exam Security and Integrity". There are many different aspects to Exam Security and Integrity. Braindumps are but one, cheaters another, gunmen yet another. Those are what we're taking care of publicly, as for what we're doing on the Vendor level, I cannot say. Not yet.
-- CertGuard
Robert,
This is getting too long to comment inline, here are my thoughts to your comments:
Yep, you've got the idea of the certs down, but not the reality. A very unscientific guess would say that a high majority of people taking cert tests are being tested, in part, for items that they haven't experienced in the real world. I've spent a fair amount of time in classes at professional training centers. I was usually there to learn what I needed, but a high percentage of those people were there to pass a test, many of them very inexperienced in some of the pre-reqs. The problem is not the people, but the whole certification setup.
If you see a problem with people passing the tests before actual experience, then the problem is with the tests, not the people. I meant what I said, what is wrong with it? Where do you draw the line on how much experience someone needs to take the test? I'm sure I've said this before - the problem is not with the people, it is with the tests.
Maybe TestKing and others have given people a means to cheat. But, how about this.... You can get a legal braindump for $125. Want your CCNA? Go sit the test before you are ready, remember as much as you can from the test. Soon as you leave, write it all down - go study and come back. Okay, if you fail, do it a few times, sooner or later, you'll get it all. It's cheaper than taking a class or paying for some really expensive training material and equipment. Besides, that CCNA will get you more $$$ in your check and more than pay for those failed tests. And this is all legal per Cisco's agreement. What's the difference, really?
Braindumps, cheaters, gunmen are only a small portion of the real problem - as you put it, the tip of the iceburg. If you really want to work to make certs more valuable, you are fighting a loosing battle by your approach. These factors will always exist until tests are developed that prevents it (or makes more difficult).
Yes, I have certs, but only because they are required by some jobs, not because I consider them valuable at all. The value I put on them has nothing to do with how many people may have cheated to get theirs, it is simply because I feel these tests do not reflect the ability of someone to do the job. That is the big problem.
Don't take my word for what the CCIE testing environment is like - try Google. There is information on what to expect on your testing day. This sounds like something you should know if you are working to make certs more valuable.
Stop putting the blame in the wrong place. Certs are not devalued because of the braindumpers, it is all the factors around the certification process. I'll take back the "nothing" comment, but I still don't belive that braindumps have a major impact on cert value. I don't believe that we are on the same side as you put it. Yes, we'd both like to see certs get valued more, but our points and approach are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum. You and I completely disagree what is important to accomplish that objective.
Or, is all this this really just about getting traffic to your site and making money?
Jim
The only reason that that 'reality', as you put it, is not what was actually intended for the exams is because of the people that prefer to _learn_ from the certifications versus learning from the job and earning the certifications later.
I do not disagree that "people are not the problem", BUT, excluding them from the equation is not the answer to the solution, and that is what you're trying to do...exclude the people.
I think I answered your question clearly enough before, I shouldn't have to answer it again.
"Legal Braindump?" By definition that is an oxymoron. If you're simply meaning that one person take and retake an exam until it has been passed, then there is nothing _illegal_ about that, but it still falls under the statement "you should have the experience before the certification", otherwise you're nothing more than a 'Paper Cert'. It's as simple as that.
Yes, they are only a small portion, but a portion nonetheless. Again, excluding them from the equation would render the rest of the process useless. The difference here is that you see it as a 'losing battle', my team and I see it as a 'necessary battle'.
I have no certifications (ZERO, ZILCH, NADA) yet I've had no problem finding work when I needed it. I don't understand how you can say they're useless, then go on to excuse the reason you have them. If you honestly felt that certifications were worthless, you would have proven to your superiors that same fact.
I will do that.
I'm not placing blame in any one place, I'm trying to determine _every_ place that blame should be and distributing it accordingly. Unlike you, I'm not excluding any factor from the equation.
Apparently I was wrong about us being on the same side then. I was under the impression you were against the use of braindumps and you wanted to see the value of your certifications increased. I apologize, it appears as if you're here for nothing more than an argument (just like me).
Yup, you got me. After all this you've finally figured out that I'm here for nothing more than to make money. Even though the information on my site is completely free, and that I'm currently running no ads on the site, except for the Amazon ads, because those are actually helping to cover the costs that I have shelled out of my own pocket over the past year. Yup, that's me, just call me Mr. Moneybags.
Please don't try to turn this conversation around to make it look like I'm here for my benefit. What's the point in that? What were you hoping to gain from that? Were you hoping to discredit my name? What were you thinking?
That was the LAST comment of yours I will be addressing here. Thanks for the time, and the content.
-- CertGuard
Because that is what the certification methods encourage.
Only because it is a losing proposition. I just say go after what is really going to make a difference.
You didn't answer where to draw the line. How much experience is enough to take an exam. Here, you only leave a gray area. The appropriate response is "enough to pass the test" - therefore, make the test warrant real experience.
Not just taking the test until passes, but taking the test for the sake of seeing what questions and answers are provided. You can learn from failing a test. I agree that this does just make paper certs. Going after brain dumpers does nothing to fix this, because this is a legit way of getting the same information - that was my point.
Whatever, under the current system of certifications, I submit that you will make very little difference in the value of certifications due to your existing approach.
Hmmmm, so why is this even important to you? As for me, I've pursued certs as a means of getting interviews. I had been at the same position for the last 10 years and my employer did not have any idea what certs I had. Only recently, when I decided to reenter the job market, did I feel it was important to come up to date with ones that I should have. I feel very confident that if I interview for the same position as someone with a paper cert, I'll get the job every time. So, the paper cert doesn't bother me.
Huh? I'll ask you again, what are you doing to try and improve the testing process?
I am against braindumps and am all for making certs valid. However, just the fact that we are debating the process and are so far apart on agreeing says that we are on opposite sides.
Okay, I wasn't trying to expose or discredit you. I was just simply trying to figure out your motive. Nothing wrong with trying to make some money off a web site. But, first, people make craploads of money off click throughs, so the potential is high if you get enough traffic, and you failed to mention your overpriced garb. Don't try to downplay the potential income for a lot of traffic on your site. Even so, nothing wrong with trying to make some money in the process. I just wanted to know what tree you are barking up. Cause if you are looking for the fruit of validating certs, I'll tell you that you are barking up the wrong tree. If you are looking for financial fruit, when then good luck in doing so. I'd just like to save my debates for someone that really cares. But, maybe the cut and run, defensive attitude says it all.
I'll reply sometime this weekend if I have the time. Otherwise, it will be monday. Right now, though, it's quittin' time.
Have a good weekend!
-- ®
Emmanuel Conde, director of recruiting for Alliant Technologies is looking for Cisco interns:
Brad Reese on Cisco Network World Magazine Cisco Subnet
You have still failed to prove to me just how certification methods *encourage* this behavior in people. If you or I were to go take an exam today, would we cheat on it "just because it's easy"? I wouldn't, but then, I have higher morals than others do.
People cheat. Everywhere. Not just on Certification Exams...everywhere. People cheat to get to the front of a line, people cheat to get better parking spaces, people cheat to get food stamps, people cheat to get better golf scores, or to provide a story to their buddies at the end of the week. It's relentless. No matter how difficult the testing methods are, you're always going to find cheaters amongst the crowd. But, if the rewards of cheating can be reduced to the point where it isn't worth taking the risk, then fewer people will do it.
You also stated "A very unscientific guess would say that a high majority of people taking cert tests are being tested, in part, for items that they haven't experienced in the real world."
Of course they are! And a better unscientific guess would be that *everyone* is being tested, in part, for items they have not yet experienced. Not everyone is going to have the EXACT same experience, but education teaches one how to deal with the situations that have not been encountered.
Still, you believe that people should be excluded. I say, they are the Key. People can make a difference, and people in numbers can make a bigger difference. Ever play Othello? You know the board game, plastic chips that are black on one side and white on the other. When one color is flanked by the opposite color, it changes sides. That is a basic analysis on our goal. We want to convert as many braindumpers as possible.
Did I need to? Look at the requirements set forth by the Vendor. That is your answer. For instance, Microsoft recommends the following:
An MCSE candidate should have at least one year of experience implementing and administering a network operating system in environments with the following characteristics:
- 200 to 26,000 supported users.
- Five to 150 physical locations.
- Typical network services and applications including file and print, database, messaging, proxy server or firewall, dial-in server, desktop management, and Web hosting.
- Connectivity needs including connecting individual offices and users at remote locations to the corporate network and connecting corporate networks to the Internet.
In addition, an MCSE candidate should have at least one year of experience in the following areas:
- Implementing and administering a desktop operating system.
- Designing a network infrastructure."
Unfortunately, no matter how _difficult_ you make a test, people are *always* going to write books about them to make them easier for people that whine about not being able to understand them. Your logic is flawed, as there will always be circumvention. The best way to handle the people on this end is to educate them about why it is wrong to cheat.
You are completely wrong about that. That method is not (and has NEVER been) legal. Certification vendors all have an Exam Retake Policy that prevents people from doing exactly that. And if that behavior is determined in a person's testing, they are warned and/or banned from the Certification Vendor's testing.
I agree that it needs to be 'beefed' up a little, but here is Cisco's:
What do you know about our 'existing approach'? You cannot make accurate claims about how much, or how little, we will make a difference, without knowing our true intentions. Yet you try to judge what we're trying to do based on these false accusations.
You...yes Jim, YOU are the reason I'm not able to focus my attention 100% on the people that really need it. Because of people like you, I have to divert my efforts to appeasing you instead of stopping people from spreading the crap that's out there. You are the reason I'm not making an impact at this point. I'm sorry, but this is it. I have made my points, and I have justified them to you, and to everyone else here that is reading this.
Because I was _planning_ those certs when I realized that getting my certifications would not only do me no good, but it was also hurting the Certifications of others. I asked my self "Why do I NEED these certifications?" and I realized that I don't _need_ them, I just wanted them. I have a degree and plenty of experience to get me past needing a certificate to tell people I can do something the degree has been telling them for years.
I too feel confident that if I were interviewing against someone with a paper cert that I would take the job every time, even without the certs. So what is your point?
Then I'll respond again: "You have to understand that what you see in public is what we can (or choose to) provide you. Our goals are to increase "Exam Security and Integrity". There are many different aspects to Exam Security and Integrity. Braindumps are but one, cheaters another, gunmen yet another. Those are what we're taking care of publicly, as for what we're doing on the Vendor level, I cannot say. Not yet."
You've completely lost me. "Opposite sides" means that we are working towards different goals. Do we have different goals? Or are thinking about different approaches to the same goal?
If you'd like to figure out my MO, then re-read the entire thread. It's pretty obvious.
As for the 'overpriced garb' #1, I designed that for ME, so that I can hand it out at IT Conventions, and to just wear it around town. #2, I only stuck it up for sale at the request of a few other people, and #3, it's only marked up 5% from the price that CafePress is charging me for it.
Ohhhhh, so that's what this is about. You don't care about Mike's original statement, this has all been about satisfying your need for a debate. Well Scooby, your debates need a lot of work. And if that's the case, then yes...save them for someone that cares, because I do not care about satisfying your need for a simple debate.
Here are some useful links: Home:
I can't "prove" this, it is my opinion. But, here is the idea... Open a jewelry store in South Central LA, don't put any locks on the doors or bars on the windows. Here is an invitation to steal. But, it would be wiser to install locks, bars and even an alarm system than to run around asking people not to steal. Even moral people can be tempted to do wrong, and occasionally give in. Remember, only Jesus was perfect. Everybody else, moral or not, has done wrong.
That's correct. And that pretty much is my point. Instead of worrying about who is cheating, make it hard for anybody to do so.
Agreed - but the tests certainly don't reflect that attitude.
I'm not saying that it is a bad thing to educate people about the braindumps and cheating. What I am saying is that if your goal is really to make certs more valuable, then the testing format needs to change. As a hiring manager (and someone who has been through cert programs), I have little faith in the testing system. Not because of braindumps, but simply because the current testing methods do not test the ability to do the job. Geez, you'd think that the vendors could actually come up with new questions - that would eliminate the braindumps altogether.
ROLF - nice copy of the site. But, first, that is a guideline. Were you aware that MCSE is actually six exams, not one. I would guess that nobody, after that minimal experience, is ready (or even close) to pass all the tests of the MCSE. Which means that studying for the missing information is needed. Guess we are right back to studying for certs as a good way to learn. Very few people actually get all the experience they need in their job to get through a comprehensive certification program like the MCSE.
Hmmm, they both have waiting periods. But, I didn't see anywhere that it says you can't keep taking until passed.
I know what you say here and what is on your web page. I believe that your approach is to go after braindumpers and the people that use them (and gunners, cheaters, etc...). I never claimed that my opinions are scientific. But, I do claim to have experience in what I am talking about, both from the perspective of being certified and from being a hiring manager.
Puh-lease.... If anything, I'm giving you the forum to express your opinion. Besides, I only sound off cause you jumped on someone's case, when I thought it was unwarranted. You seem to have very little tolerance for an opinion that is not yours.
So, then, what are you worried about? My point is that if someone cheated and got their cert, then it has not hurt me. I still get the job. You are saying that the cheaters are devaluing the certs. I strongly believe that the reason certs are not more valued than they are has very little to do with the cheaters. You just helped make my point.
There is nothing wrong with that. But, you go under the pretense that fixing this somehow makes certs so much more valuable. And that is just plain wrong. As I've stated before, certs had the same issue before braindumps were a thing.
I challenge you to go through a comprehensive certification program (MCSE or CCNP). Not for gaining the certs, but for the sake of the experience. Go for the one that you have the most knowledge in. You need to see what the testing is like. See if you think these programs really test your ability to work on someone's network. If you are going stand at the pulpit and criticize people, you should know first hand what you are talking about. Seriously, if you don't consider certs important to get, then what do you care if people are cheating or not?
I think we do have different goals. You could argue that we both want better certifications. But, I would say that my goal is to make certification more indicative of one's abilities, while your goal is to eliminate cheaters. I see nothing wrong with your goal, but it is not my goal.
Whatever, believe what you want. While I'll admit that I don't mind an occasional debate, try looking at your own track record. And, I could certainly say the same about your debating skills. But, that's getting a little personal, now, isn't it? That doesn't have anything to do with the validity of certs.
So, go away. If I'm just the little nobody with poor debating skills, then I shouldn't threaten your position at all and there is no reason that I should be wasting any more of your time. Everyone else will see right through my flawed logic. Just keep in mind that the sooner you stop debating, the sooner I will too :-P
This is the only thing I have time to respond to today...and I don't see any other replies in your near future.
If you think adding locks to a vehicle in South Central LA will do you any good, you're sadly mistaken.
Actually, because I was born and raised in the LA area, I know better. The ONLY way to keep people from busting your windows to get into your vehicle is to keep the windows rolled down. Is it still an invitation to steal...yes. But are people going to steal something if they feel there is little to no value in what they are stealing...it is NOT as likely they will.
Stop trying to divert the problem. Anyone can cheat.
Do we ALL cheat? No.
Why Not? Because some of us have morals.
It is NOT because the CVs are "asking" for people to steal their exam materials, so stop trying to make them out to be the bad guys.
-- CertGuard
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.