Beaker wrote:
| >> I say screw certification, who needs it? 
| >I second that.
(my 'third' is below...)

| >
| >When I talked to the head of LCC Computer Science,
| >for the downtown center, she said that the >certification would not
| >be valuable locally and thats >why it wasn't funded.
| 
| DING! - that's the problem: there is nearly zero demand for anything
| linux locally.

AHA!  BUT, there's almost always, anywhere you go, a relative
vacuum around "a better mousetrap", and with all the
cutting-edge hacking going on in every little nook and niche domain, it
takes only slightly clever plug-and-play-around to get something
implemented, if you can establish a foothold on the steep and slippery
slope... I mean to say, I've been thinking about building some mythtv
boxes, to resell, for a while now, but don't have the capital.  Not only
are there folks at a much more comfy mid-level of opportunity out there,
but now there are bigger and more serious companies that will get an
even better profit margin from such an endeavor.  Standard PC stuff, all
the way, and likely ideal to use a fanless via chipset; with hardware
video encoding and a diskless option, I think a well-managed initiative
could easily grow into a small-but-very-profitable cooperative.
Any takers??  Puh-leaze.  I say, there *is* a demand for linux locally,
even if it means organizing and shipping products away.


| Also, I think a big part of Linux/Open Source's attraction is
| tinkering with things and figuring it out on ones own or amongst ones
| peers. IMHO its still a geek thing and  that kinda works against those
| wanting to create profitable multi-tiered learning programs like all
| those "Certified M$ Cubicle Monkey" classes one sees at nearly every
| community college in this country. Of course if businesses suddenly
| decided to adopt Linux and/or Open Office in large numbers...

Exactly; tinkering to the point of usefulness  ( =
Think about the new breed of geeks, trying to learn some business
sense...


| Lastly, not to question Ken's competency (I'm quite sure he knows his
| stuff), but shouldn't a <org/distro of your choice> certification
| class be taught by someone who _has_ that certification?
| 
| -Beaker

Hear, hear.  In the case of reviewing for redhat's standardized
testing, however, I don't know that it matters so much.  I disclaim that
I have not researched the breadth of the questions (and also don't
intend to offend), but from what I've seen of it, they want familiarity
with a broad-but-general array of how-to knowledge.  Some of the more
specialized testing knowledge(in other tests) seems to pull on collected
wisdom and is more aligned to well-thought-out responses than rote
operations.  I agree that many certs are overvalued, but thy do have a
place in our big world.  ( =

regards,

   Ben B
_______________________________________________
EuG-LUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug

Reply via email to