Sorry for the necro-posting, but I would like to talk about this topic once more to prompt for a few opinions.
On 21/08/2014 10:59, Anselm Lingnau wrote: [...] > LPI has done a lot of work in recent years assimilating the other > non-vendor Linux certifications (like CompTIA Linux+). Having an > entirely new certification pop up on what amounts to LPI's turf can > only be considered a setback for those efforts, especially if it seems > to have fairly wide backing from the industry. Last month I had a short talk about the Linux Foundation Certifications with Jim Zemlin, LF's Executive Director, whom I met at the latest LinuxCon Europe in Düsseldorf. He told me that it was not a LF's idea to setup their own certification program, but that they started to work on it prompted by the incoming requests of a performance-based certification by a number of firms (I did not ask which businesses they were, but I take they are LF corporate members). There is a good news regarding the LF certification program: that it is distinctly different from LPI's in method. This might mean that LPI and LF could cover partially separate certification markets and needs, instead of just eroding each others market. The bad news is that, though they are very different in method, they do have a significant overlap in scope: they certify vendor-independent Linux professionals in the fundamental uses of the OS. And, as Anselm rightly pointed out, LF already enjoys a very respectable reputation, has a noteworthy list of corporate members that are big players in the IT world, and they not only are strictly connected with Linux, they actually happen to *be* Linux, nothing less. In my mind, LPI's greatest risk lies with those individuals and organizations that do not feel particularly inclined towards one or the other method of candidate testing, and they might choose based on which certification they perceive to be the most visible or widespread one, or the easiest/most comfortable to take or the cheapest. Neither certification is easier than the other: I expect one who fails one to fail the other too. But LF's cert is easier in the sense that you can take it from home. About the cost: LPIC-1 costs 183x2$=366$ vs 300$ for LFCS, but LPI's certifications last five years from the date of the latest certification earned, while LF certifications just two years each. Not a very strong difference, in my opinion, at least compared with currently available enterprise-vendor specific offerings. So, what might a decisive factor be that could have a prospective Linux certified professional choose LPI against LF? Subject matter coverage, of course. LPI has an indisputable advantage in the LPIC-3 and Linux Essentials certifications, both in scope and diversity. That could change in the future, however, though I believe LF might extend their offer only in the higher, more specialized market of Linux, not down to the entry-level field. And, as far as I know, LPIC-3 certifications are not in high demand, they are quite a niche market in truth. I wonder if LPI should (and could!) keep a coverage advantage compared to LF, and how it could do so. The only thing that has come to my mind is the request that surfaced a couple of times to add a certification focused on mobile/embedded devices. That's a tough one to deliver, because the mobile hardware market is so fragmented, diverse, unstandardized and so few devices can run a generic Linux distribution. On the other hand, that market looks promising, the number of Linux-derived OSes in on the increase (Android, FirefoxOS, Tizen, plus some third party solutions like OpenWRT), the LF is about to run the tenth yearly Linux Embedded Conference, Intel has long been pushing the Yocto project, several independent projects aim at running a full Linux distribution chrooted under Android or natively in an Android device. Is there enough material to put up something like a Linux Embedded Essentials certification? Do we have the energy and expertise to try that? Perhaps the most important question is: is there actually a market for such a certification to warrant the effort? > It would be good to have an official statement from LPI detailing > their position on the Linux Foundation's certification scheme and what > it will do to corporate sponsorship of LPI (which AFAIK comes from > many of the same sources that are now apparently waxing lyrical about > the new certification) but I'm not holding my breath. Anselm > (Disclaimer: This is my own opinion and not that of my employer.) I wished someone had answered this question, even if unofficially. For the time being, I would like to learn from the individuals now busy on LPI certification instruction and delivery what they think is best for LPI to do considering their own experience: extend the certifications offered? Consider on-line, remotely proctored certification exams à la Linux Foundation? Consider offering a performance-based certification? An embedded-device one? Something totally different from any of these? No change at all, as LPI is already delivering the best possible certification path? No change at all, as LPI cannot afford the effort and trying to do it would lead to a downgrade of the presently available offer?* Alessandro *) My pick, at the moment. -- Alessandro Selli Tel: 340.839.73.05 http://alessandro.route-add.net, VOIP: sip:[email protected] Chiave firma PGP/GPG signing key: B7FD89FD _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
