From: Paul Dardinski (pauld@marshallcomm.com)
Date: Wed Dec 05 2007 - 22:20:05 ART
Darby,
Please note that I am absolutely certain that Cisco will not allow the
cert to be devalued. Whenever the magic number hits 30k or whatever is
really irrelevant. It's a very difficult test and quite highly valued in
the industry and this has basically caused a larger number to pursue it.
As has been said before here, it's not so much what the number is vs.
what it means. Honestly I haven't met too many CCIE's who didn't know
what they were talking about. Yes, there will always be a few bad
apples, but in the end it's only a milestone, not an
ending.....besides...there will always be room for differentiation by
dual-cert, etc.
PD (#16842)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Darby Weaver
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:13 PM
To: Scott Vermillion; 'Joseph Brunner'; 'Gary Duncanson'; 'cindy tanner'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: OT: RE: magic numbers
Actually, the CCIE with number 30,000 will likely
occur at the current rate by the end of 2008.
The number 20,000 will happen pretty close to the end
of 2007 at the current rate, unless we just got a big
fluke.
Now the number of active CCIE's will dwindle as well.
As Narbik pointed only about 16,000 or so active at
the moment.
Many get into other lucrative careers, advance in
management or other aspects of I.T.
And then there are those who reap what they sow and
find out that a piece of paper truly holds anything.
I suspect these folks may maintain their certs but
some will just let go - it is a value proposition.
Overall the outlook is favorable. However, the golden
halo days are numbered.
Of course being a CCIE versus not being a CCIE....
Still is a worth its while.
--- Scott Vermillion <scott_ccie_list@it-ag.com>
wrote:
> Yeah, but it's kinda like guessing the number of
> jellybeans in a really,
> really large jar. I'm drawn to such nonsense (and
> rarely guess anywhere
> near correctly)...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Brunner
> [mailto:joe@affirmedsystems.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:57 PM
> To: 'Scott Vermillion'; 'Gary Duncanson'; 'cindy
> tanner'
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: magic numbers
>
> Any takers on when 30k comes to pass??
>
> October 2010
>
> Guess what?
>
> By then the number certified *might* be 20,000. Many
> who have it now will
> lapse, pass away, retire from the business, etc.
>
> Which in a world of million networks means it's
> still going to be quite a
> good living.
>
> Imagine in the WHOLE WORLD there were *only* 20,000
> doctors... Imagine how
> much each one would make...
>
> ;)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Scott Vermillion
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 2:44 PM
> To: 'Gary Duncanson'; 'cindy tanner'
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: magic numbers
>
> I can only hope it takes that long Gary! (and that
> I somehow miraculously
> pass on my first attempt in early Feb). Any takers
> on when 30k comes to
> pass??
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Gary
> Duncanson
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 12:27 PM
> To: cindy tanner
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: magic numbers
>
> Cindy,
>
> It's a mystery to me. I reckon we will be 20000 come
> end of February.
>
> Regards
> Gary
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "cindy tanner" <cindy.a.tanner@gmail.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:10 PM
> Subject: OT: magic numbers
>
>
> > Experts,
> > As I study and watch the messages go by, I have
> noticed that numbers
> > 19499
> > and 19519 seem to have occurred on the same day.
> Is Cisco turning out 20
> > CCIEs per day? I assumed Cisco assigned numbers
> sequentially - maybe
> > this
> > is not the case? Anybody know?
> >
> > Cindy
> > cindy.a.tanner@gmail.com
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 12:04:29 ARST