Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>Serious hackers never like certifications; they see them as something that
>their boss is liable to waste their time making them take. The people who
>like certifications will not generally be subscribed to this list.
>
>
>
In support of Josh's point, let me share my experience with the
certification requirement. When I was at Microsoft, I was required to
pass 2 MCP exams every year. After I passed an average of 6 MCP exams a
year for two years (in addition to less marketing-centric exams like the
Server+), I decided that it was pointless. I dropped to the minimum and
began to heavily contribute to Microsoft's marketing strategy (it was my
idea to take Services for UNIX to Linuxworld). The reaction of the
management was "You are not surpassing the minumum on this goal of
passing MCP exams. We cannot support you doing other things that don't
contribute to your core metrics." It was not that long after this that
I resigned my position at Microsoft though for other unrelated reasons.
Most vendor-sponsored certs focus on marketing products. They are a
great success in what they are supposed to do (generate large number of
technicians who are married to a product). But in the long run, I think
that they are a losing strategy. While advocacy is important, I think
that substance is more important than marketing. I assume everyone else
on this list agrees because otherwise we would be using MySQL....
This is also why I have long advocated the development of an open source
database concepts curriculum. Lets build something which is actually
*useful* and if someone wants to build a certification based on it, so
be it.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting
