This could actually be a seperate post on another forum but I will just say this.
You can stumble through your Microsoft certs, which means they hold about the same weight with me as Helium. However, when it comes to RHCE or the other leading Linux cert program (the name of it skips me right now but its bad ass) skip one too many times and you trip and fall. I would take a Linux cert over a MS cert any time, any day :) Doc On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 18:15, Andrew Gaffney wrote: > gabriel wrote: > > i have to say that this sort of response is VERY surprising to me. while i > > only have a small network here @home, i've had very few problems when it > > comes to stability (mostly the linux learning curve). and what's this about > > "certified training classes"? why would you need that? just pick up a book > > and go nuts. i've always felt that certification is just the windows world > > thinking being imposed on linux. ...i mean, how is having some piece of > > paper mean you can do your job? > > > > this, like everything else i post is not meant to be a match in a gas-filled > > room, but i find this thinking very odd and would like to hear if there are > > others who swing this way. > > I completely agree with you that having a piece of paper that says you > know what you're doing doesn't necessarily mean you do. It also works > the other way around. Just because you don't have a piece of paper, it > doesn't mean that you know absolutely nothing. But then again, I did > just take the 2nd part of the test today for my A+ Certification. I hate > conforming.... -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
