April 2, 2010 at 12:07 pm
Jeff has a fair point. It's also not "Microsoft" as a monolithic entity. I think many of us, myself included, sometimes struggle to conceptualize Microsoft as a whole lot of little groups like those we work in.
I am sure that the training group, which I believe in inside the larger MS Learning group, does try to produce some revenue. Otherwise they'd probably be giving books away to try and get more developers. So there is likely some profit motive/incentive for that small group of people.
Which means they may compromise the way they present materials or do business in order to attract people to their products. It may possibly even be at odds with the best interests of the rest of the company.
However in terms of effect, their profit or loss is so small that it's not enough for the larger overall company to worry about.
April 6, 2010 at 11:31 pm
Jeff Moden (3/30/2010)
blandry (3/30/2010)
I am tired of this debate and can only address it as I know it...The best DBAs that I have seen, worked with, or had work for me, DID NOT have certifications. They had what I would call "battlefield experience". If you think answering a bunch of vanilla questions and getting a grade then makes you are true "SQL Soldier" you have bigger problems in your career than just getting sheepskins.
As well, bear one point in mind above all - Certifications are a Revenue Center for Microsoft - They make money on them, big money. If you were THAT talented why would you pay to take a test to show it - it would show on its own in your experience, your references and your attitude. You would not be paying to take a test to get a few letters after your name.
Lastly, I took two certification tests in my career (years ago) and passed them. I was twice certified in Visual FoxPro. Visual FoxPro is now dead. Microsoft killed it off. So I have one question...
Who, and where, at Microsoft, do I write to to get my almost $5,000 dollars back???
I'll stongly second that. Heh... especially the parts about the debate and the "battlefield experience".
In case no-one got there before me, I'll third it.
We have another thread going on this topic (value of certifications) already, so I can understand "tired of this debate".
The "MS Revenue Centre" point is one we should all understand (and they are a Revenue Centre for the sort of training company that wants to blitz some short term knowledge into you to pass the exam and forget completely the next day).
The record ("battlefield experience") and the attitude are the things that we can check in reality, certs at the level of a bunch of vanilla questions don't actually mean a thing.
Tom
April 7, 2010 at 12:05 am
Jeff Moden (4/2/2010)
All I wanted to know is whether or not Microsoft makes money at training or not. My analogy is "is Microsoft wearing a shirt or not." 😉
The interesting question is not whether it makes money out of training or not, but whether it makes money out of certifications or not (after all, it charges separately for certifications and for training). Judging by the price of the certifications, and the standards of the exams, and the number of non-MS training companies doing intensive coaching for those exams (which is a good indicator of business vbolume for MS in its certifications business) it must make money unless its certification operation is gloriously inefficient, suffering from serious bureaucracy-bloat, and overpaying everyone involved - and I don't for a moment believe that MS is that incompetent.
Tom
April 7, 2010 at 8:21 am
Tom.Thomson (4/6/2010)
The "MS Revenue Centre" point is one we should all understand (and they are a Revenue Centre for the sort of training company that wants to blitz some short term knowledge into you to pass the exam and forget completely the next day).
My guess is that you have never taken one of the certs, so how exactly do you know that? I took my 2005 cert 3+ years ago and I can clearly remember some of the topics in detail that I may never have touched otherwise. The paper itself may not be a true guide to capabilities, but the knowledge you can gain from the study is substantial (if you are willing to put in the time and effort).
Tom.Thomson (4/6/2010)
The record ("battlefield experience") and the attitude are the things that we can check in reality, certs at the level of a bunch of vanilla questions don't actually mean a thing.
I'll agree that the MCP and MCITP questions were too easy for my liking, but to say that they don't mean a thing is incorrect - go ask for a job with a company that requires that cert when you don't have it. You are also putting all certs on the same level - do you really mean to say that the MCM cert is meaningless and is comprised of vanilla questions?
April 7, 2010 at 8:43 am
The certs mean something, the question is what? I'd say it's "in the eye of the beholder" to butcher a cliche.
For HR departments, it's a nice filter. That means it makes their job easier. For an individual, it's something to point to on their resume. For a hiring manager, it shows some level of motivation, though perhaps not skill. For a peer, it can be a point of jealousy or disgust, depending on the person's skill.
The certs do force you to learn something. Even if you memorize 100 answers, I bet 5 of them stick with you. It's what you do before and after the cert (or what you don't do) that tends to upset many professionals.
Viewing 5 posts - 31 through 34 (of 34 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply