Insipid Propagandizing
2007-08-21
I'm sick of the zealotry.
Last week I had a plan to take another look at IT certifications as a way of shoring up my CV. See, I want to be a developer, probably user applications, but my current job is mostly IT management. Well, I do a fair bit of work on the in-house applications, but it's far from my main focus. I need something to demonstrate some competence and commitment to the field in order to make the transition.
I sent a message to a suitably knowledgeable friend, at the same time asking on a forum I run (where other knowledgeable friends can be found) and here*, where yet more knowledgeable friends** sometimes pass through. The message was basically that I was looking for a software development certification, that something non vendor-specific would be nice, but that for the sake of having something well recognised I might end up starting the Microsoft ones.
The first response I got was helpful. He pointed out that he doesn't have any, but recommended the MS ones because they're well known and 'relatively easily achievable'. My thoughts exactly: I doubt they're hard as such (although I must take care because I have a history of being really bad at studying) but they're still unusual enough to make an impression, and they still have Microsoft's name behind them.
And there's the crux of the matter. The other response I got was from someone who loathes Microsoft. The sort of person who freely spews vitriol with no attempt to justify it. There's just no need for it. Yes, I have a hard time advocating Microsoft, but I'm selling a service here, and for application development Microsoft platforms - and their pet languages - are a huge target market.
If you left that message - you know who you are - then by all means read on. This is the response that I drafted at the time and decided to throw away rather than submit.
For the rest of you, I won't quote the message, but the suggestions included CCNA and finding something offered by Oracle.
Oracle wasn't a bad suggestion. They have a wide range of certifications, but from a quick glance at their range I couldn't find anything quite right. Ultimately if I'm going to side with a name and it's Microsoft vs. Oracle, the tie-break is that I have never used any of Oracle's products...
CCNA? For a software developer? As much as I'd love to be CCNA, I really can't consider becoming any more qualified in things I don't want to do***. In defence it was claimed that it's preprequisite to a lot of software development (a statement I still don't believe) but perhaps I should have made it clearer that it's apps I'm interested in. If I wanted to work at low level I'd learn C and join one of the OSS driver projects: much easier to demonstrate competence in the open source world, if you have enough of it.
The bit that was really a slap in the face, not to mention an unnecessary and tactless thing to say, was that the commenter had a 'personal preference for experience over certification.' Me too, oddly enough. But experience can't be gained quickly, and if you're trying to move between disciplines it probably can't be earned at all. Not to mention the fact that experience doesn't show up on paper: time spent doing something isn't proof of having learnt from it, in the same way that a qualification isn't proof of the knowledge that it was intended to test.
The other point, was that I should avoid the Microsoft 'guff' because 'everyone knows it's not worth the paper it's printed on'. I dispute this on the following (positive feedback) basis:
The last straw, and the reason I've dredged this back up for a response at least, was being called 'Evil One' for being in favour of the MS certifications. Is it petty season or something? Joke, yes, but some jokes just aren't funny.
If I'm to listen to bitching about Microsoft, I want a decent case-by-case analysis of why particular points are stronger elsewhere. I don't want to hear isolated technical analyses from people who don't pay any attention to real-world concerns like staff training costs. Advocacy, not zealotry: I'm smart enough, if you're right I'll accept it.
Rant over. I'm sorry.
* Although style guides and the like frown on the use of 'here' as link text, I do actually mean here, on this site :-P.(And I didn't say 'click')
** The more cynical among you may not consider the readers of my blog to be my friends. But I'd be a little disappointed by that, since the chances are if you got that far you're one of my regular readers, and unless you are lurking and I don't know about you, I'd like to consider you a friend.
*** To be honest, when I claim to be overqualified it's because I have a Master's degree that I'm not using. I'm not really overqualified in anything in particular, because in Mathematics a Master's isn't qualified enough for the really fun stuff.
Last week I had a plan to take another look at IT certifications as a way of shoring up my CV. See, I want to be a developer, probably user applications, but my current job is mostly IT management. Well, I do a fair bit of work on the in-house applications, but it's far from my main focus. I need something to demonstrate some competence and commitment to the field in order to make the transition.
I sent a message to a suitably knowledgeable friend, at the same time asking on a forum I run (where other knowledgeable friends can be found) and here*, where yet more knowledgeable friends** sometimes pass through. The message was basically that I was looking for a software development certification, that something non vendor-specific would be nice, but that for the sake of having something well recognised I might end up starting the Microsoft ones.
The first response I got was helpful. He pointed out that he doesn't have any, but recommended the MS ones because they're well known and 'relatively easily achievable'. My thoughts exactly: I doubt they're hard as such (although I must take care because I have a history of being really bad at studying) but they're still unusual enough to make an impression, and they still have Microsoft's name behind them.
And there's the crux of the matter. The other response I got was from someone who loathes Microsoft. The sort of person who freely spews vitriol with no attempt to justify it. There's just no need for it. Yes, I have a hard time advocating Microsoft, but I'm selling a service here, and for application development Microsoft platforms - and their pet languages - are a huge target market.
If you left that message - you know who you are - then by all means read on. This is the response that I drafted at the time and decided to throw away rather than submit.
For the rest of you, I won't quote the message, but the suggestions included CCNA and finding something offered by Oracle.
Oracle wasn't a bad suggestion. They have a wide range of certifications, but from a quick glance at their range I couldn't find anything quite right. Ultimately if I'm going to side with a name and it's Microsoft vs. Oracle, the tie-break is that I have never used any of Oracle's products...
CCNA? For a software developer? As much as I'd love to be CCNA, I really can't consider becoming any more qualified in things I don't want to do***. In defence it was claimed that it's preprequisite to a lot of software development (a statement I still don't believe) but perhaps I should have made it clearer that it's apps I'm interested in. If I wanted to work at low level I'd learn C and join one of the OSS driver projects: much easier to demonstrate competence in the open source world, if you have enough of it.
The bit that was really a slap in the face, not to mention an unnecessary and tactless thing to say, was that the commenter had a 'personal preference for experience over certification.' Me too, oddly enough. But experience can't be gained quickly, and if you're trying to move between disciplines it probably can't be earned at all. Not to mention the fact that experience doesn't show up on paper: time spent doing something isn't proof of having learnt from it, in the same way that a qualification isn't proof of the knowledge that it was intended to test.
The other point, was that I should avoid the Microsoft 'guff' because 'everyone knows it's not worth the paper it's printed on'. I dispute this on the following (positive feedback) basis:
- Not everyone knows they are worthless.
- Since the value of certification is based entirely on perception, the more people who consider a certification worthwhile, the more worthwhile it is.
The last straw, and the reason I've dredged this back up for a response at least, was being called 'Evil One' for being in favour of the MS certifications. Is it petty season or something? Joke, yes, but some jokes just aren't funny.
If I'm to listen to bitching about Microsoft, I want a decent case-by-case analysis of why particular points are stronger elsewhere. I don't want to hear isolated technical analyses from people who don't pay any attention to real-world concerns like staff training costs. Advocacy, not zealotry: I'm smart enough, if you're right I'll accept it.
Rant over. I'm sorry.
* Although style guides and the like frown on the use of 'here' as link text, I do actually mean here, on this site :-P.(And I didn't say 'click')
** The more cynical among you may not consider the readers of my blog to be my friends. But I'd be a little disappointed by that, since the chances are if you got that far you're one of my regular readers, and unless you are lurking and I don't know about you, I'd like to consider you a friend.
*** To be honest, when I claim to be overqualified it's because I have a Master's degree that I'm not using. I'm not really overqualified in anything in particular, because in Mathematics a Master's isn't qualified enough for the really fun stuff.
Comments