From: Brant I. Stevens (branto@branto.com)
Date: Thu Sep 06 2007 - 17:51:58 ART
Yeah, they own SuSE Linux now, and have a Linux certification.
On Sep 6, 2007, at 10:31 AM, "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
> Heheheh... Does anyone do Novell anymore? :) It's all unix stuff
> now,
> isn't it?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of Gary
> Duncanson
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 6:05 AM
> To: Scott Morris
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: CCIE vs MCA
>
> Right on. Particularly about the OSPF/Voice thing. I also wonder how
> rigerous the MCA tests on areas like SAN, clustering and UNIX
> integration
> etc.The MCA will not cover a lot of things. It might be useful for
> the site
> failover thing. You worry about global load balancing while they
> worry about
> the application side. Actually that's a good break, you worry about
> getting
> packets someplace while the MCA gets bashed for the application
> churn and
> screwed up address books and active directory across the entire
> enterprise:)
>
> Interestingly the MCNE has retired this year. I suppose Novell are not
> chasing the super duper concept.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Morris" <smorris@ipexpert.com>
> To: "'Joseph Brunner'" <joe@affirmedsystems.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:57 AM
> Subject: RE: CCIE vs MCA
>
>
>> I think that MS has simply realized that the MCSE only equates to a
>> piece
>> of
>> paper that doesn't really help anyone determine which candidate sucks
>> worse
>> than the other one. The MCA is fairly rigorous, and more power to
>> them.
>> I
>> only know of a couple people who have passed this cert and they've
>> been
>> around for eons, so it didn't surprise me at all.
>>
>> What's it mean to a CCIE? Nothing. Can we up the ante for the CCIE
>> program. Sure, if they felt like it. But no matter what you do, it
>> simply
>> boils down to whether you can really "do" it or not. Talking about
>> it, or
>> selecting the right answer (or kinda-sorta-the-best-rightish
>> answer) from
>> a
>> multiple choice exam doesn't exactly equate to an experienced
>> individual.
>>
>> As people have noted before, neither does a CCIE lab. There are
>> many real
>> world issues to properly run a network that a CCIE candidate simply
>> doesn't
>> have to deal with. Probably a good thing anyway, it's a long
>> enough eight
>> hours! :)
>>
>> But that leaves room for improvement and/or enhancement. Stick
>> around
>> long
>> enough and things will change.
>>
>> But I still wouldn't fear an MCA. I'd have 'em around in a
>> heartbeat to
>> design and implement a huge active directory and/or exchange
>> network. But
>> at the same time if they decided they wanted to try their hat at
>> large
>> scale
>> OSPF design or voice implementations I'd have to hurt them.
>>
>> I don't think you're going to find all that many people with CCIE +
>> MCA
>> just
>> because there isn't enough time in a work week to delve into that
>> many
>> areas
>> of expertise! I suppose it's possible, but there's plenty of space
>> for
>> both
>> to exist without worrying about which one is cooler than the other!
>>
>> If everyone worried about themselves and enhancing their own personal
>> level
>> of experience, we wouldn't have to worry about anything! :)
>>
>>
>> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
>> JNCIE
>> #153, CISSP, et al.
>> CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
>> VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
>> IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
>>
>> A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning Credits!
>>
>> smorris@ipexpert.com
>>
>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
>> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
>> http://www.ipexpert.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
>> Behalf Of
>> Joseph Brunner
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 4:29 PM
>> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: CCIE vs MCA
>>
>> Sure you could call them apples and oranges, (or even cauliflowers
>> and
>> cantaloupes), but if you think failing the CCIE lab a few times is
>> harsh.
>>
>>
>>
>> Check out Microsoft's MCA requirements.
>>
>>
>>
>> MCA : infrastructure
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/architect/archprocess/default.mspx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> MCA : messaging architect
>>
>>
>>
>> Candidates for the program must meet rigorous prerequisites. This
>> ensures
>> that individuals who have been accepted already possess many of the
>> unique
>> skills that are necessary to be effective. Years of experience
>> working
>> with
>> Exchange are required, in addition to passing a lab-based entrance
>> exam.
>> During the rigorous training (four weeks, six days a week, 12 hours a
>> day),
>> several other tests are administered.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> If two of these tests are not passed, candidates are prohibited from
>> taking
>> the final qualification exam-they will not become Certified Messaging
>> Architects.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/architect/messaging/
>> default.mspx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I first thought this was an april fool's type joke. but it's real.
>> Microsoft
>> is making up for years of being a joke with their MCSE who can't
>> set up a
>> dhcp scope, etc.
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:09 ART