CISCO Training......worth it?
- Thread starter snagrat
- Start date
Just found out today at work that they are planning to put me any my mate through more training with a view towards us being out in the field supporting the cisco products we will be selling if we become a reseller.
CCNA here I come (hopefully)... woo-hoo!
CCNA here I come (hopefully)... woo-hoo!
Associate
- Joined
- 18 May 2006
- Posts
- 474
- Location
- Somewhere South
Richdog said:Just found out today at work that they are planning to put me any my mate through more training with a view towards us being out in the field supporting the cisco products we will be selling if we become a reseller.
CCNA here I come (hopefully)... woo-hoo!
mabey if your lucky they will put you through CCNP then you can get offers from other companies aswell and mabey an even better job!
lucifersam said:
MCSE is though, quite frankly, a joke. Its not worth the paper it is written on, it may not be easy but personally I would prefer too come out with a CCIE than a full MCSE.
In an MCP you tell the exam paper what microsoft wants too hear, not what (often) is the practical solution.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 May 2006
- Posts
- 474
- Location
- Somewhere South
Sin_Chase said:
you go tell that to all the companies that run MS based networks, i think they will tell you otherwise, after all who is better qualified to run a microsoft network than some who has a microsoft qualification?
Sin_Chase said:
Thats funny, because I have seen many decently paid I.T. jobs specifically advertsing for candidates to have an MCSE as a requirement.
A more accurate statement would be: "An MCSE is not worth the paper it's written on if you don't have the pracctical skills and relevant experience to back it up.
Too many places nowadays are offering "fast track" MCSE courses, and people with sod-all I.T. knowledge and experience are signing themselves up in the vain hope that the cert alone will get them somewhere. A bloke I used to work with was doing an MCSE and he was completely flippin clueless.
MCSE's are worth it... but too many peple are abusing them and this has the unfortunate effect of lowering their credibility.
Last edited:
Sin_Chase said:
It's not that bad, although comparing it to a CCIE is crazy. It's like everything in education, if you cheat to get through then ultimately it's you who will suffer. Problem is, it's far to easy to cheat to get the MCSE (Not just MCSE BTW, Cisco certs suffer this as well).
At the end of the day, if you really earned a CCNA/MCSE then you'll be of real value to a company. If you just swanned through by using brain dumps then you won't get anywhere.
lucifersam said:
There are MCSEs out there who have never even had to admin a live network. What you learn in the classroom isn't the same as the real world.
I'm not saying that doing an MCSE is worthless, it's just that if won't make you an expert admin on its own.
MCSE, or as a colleague of mine puts it "Must Consult Someone Experienced" 
imo though, having been sent on various MS Windows Server 2003 courses through work I could probably spend a week swotting up and get $GENERIC_MS_CERTIFICATE but I dont because:
1) neither me or my current employer consider it worthwhile
2) inertia/ lack of timetime
3) its a sub-degree qualification (as is the CCNA tbh)- its a bit like going to study a GNVQ when you have a PhD- utterly pointless and in my situation if I were to do it it wouldnt really be worth putting on my CV
4) it trains people to think within the constraints of the MS framework, and has the candidates doing often quite complex administration tasks without understanding the underlying theory. A good example of this would be that you get taught how to configure a DNS server for your domain's Active Directory, without a mention of what DNS is, how it resolves names to IP addresses, the differences between DNS name resolution and WINS...I could go on
Of course these problems are not isolated to the MS and Cisco certifications but I think what employers and employees alike need to realise that these qualifications alone will not make you a good admin- at best they are a crash course in the features of a specific architecture's built-in configuration and management tools.
Just my $0.02 and a bit of a one-sided rant Im afraid
imo though, having been sent on various MS Windows Server 2003 courses through work I could probably spend a week swotting up and get $GENERIC_MS_CERTIFICATE but I dont because:
1) neither me or my current employer consider it worthwhile
2) inertia/ lack of timetime
3) its a sub-degree qualification (as is the CCNA tbh)- its a bit like going to study a GNVQ when you have a PhD- utterly pointless and in my situation if I were to do it it wouldnt really be worth putting on my CV
4) it trains people to think within the constraints of the MS framework, and has the candidates doing often quite complex administration tasks without understanding the underlying theory. A good example of this would be that you get taught how to configure a DNS server for your domain's Active Directory, without a mention of what DNS is, how it resolves names to IP addresses, the differences between DNS name resolution and WINS...I could go on
Of course these problems are not isolated to the MS and Cisco certifications but I think what employers and employees alike need to realise that these qualifications alone will not make you a good admin- at best they are a crash course in the features of a specific architecture's built-in configuration and management tools.
Just my $0.02 and a bit of a one-sided rant Im afraid
M0KUJ1N said:MCSE, or as a colleague of mine puts it "Must Consult Someone Experienced"
imo though, having been sent on various MS Windows Server 2003 courses through work I could probably spend a week swotting up and get $GENERIC_MS_CERTIFICATE but I dont because:
1) neither me or my current employer consider it worthwhile
2) inertia/ lack of timetime
3) its a sub-degree qualification (as is the CCNA tbh)- its a bit like going to study a GNVQ when you have a PhD- utterly pointless and in my situation if I were to do it it wouldnt really be worth putting on my CV
4) it trains people to think within the constraints of the MS framework, and has the candidates doing often quite complex administration tasks without understanding the underlying theory. A good example of this would be that you get taught how to configure a DNS server for your domain's Active Directory, without a mention of what DNS is, how it resolves names to IP addresses, the differences between DNS name resolution and WINS...I could go on
Of course these problems are not isolated to the MS and Cisco certifications but I think what employers and employees alike need to realise that these qualifications alone will not make you a good admin- at best they are a crash course in the features of a specific architecture's built-in configuration and management tools.
Just my $0.02 and a bit of a one-sided rant Im afraid
depends how you get the cert tbh
a few places teach you to pass, but the good ones teach you everything.
Richdog said:I just got back from a work-sponsored CSA (Cisco Sales Associate) course... and while that isn't as techie as a CCNA, to someone who knew sod-all about Cisco it was a fabulous course that taught me a hell of a lot about Cisco products and networkign as a whole, it covered a lot of material in a day.
Cisco really is the dogs-nadgers, future-proof solutions that integrate pretty much seamlessly with other networking equipment and are about as "plug and play" as "serious" networking equipment can get. Not to mention their features and upgradeablility... I was very impressed to say the least, and have a desire to lear more.
My company is planning to be a Cisco reseller and I hope to get a CCNA out of it. So in short: i'd say if you want a promising career in networking then a CCNA is most definately worth it.
No offense but you really did swallow the marketing schpeel
In the real world Cisco kit *is* good, but only if your network is 100% Cisco core to edge. Try to do VLAN propagation to other switches and all bets are off. Bit of a problem when you have bladecenters for example as they often have their own integrated switches.
Also Nortel does everything Cisco does, for less. Every man and his dog is Cisco, very hard in a competative situation to offer anything different to the other 2 companies tendering for a project. Be the Nortel guys able to do the same for less, then it gets interesting. Can be a real competative advantage.
i graduated with a business computing degree and have been studying for a CCNA qualification for the past 4 months. On its own qualifications are nothing but i have 40 odd years left of work a head of me so im sure to get a lot of experience to go with it and may be do the CCNP aswell.
VeNT said:
I went to one of the "good" places (ITS-EMWAC if you're interested- they covered material well outwith the scope of the course and STILL compressed a 8 day course into 5 days in one case). However as the certificate granting body and the exam are the same no matter who you go with, there is no real distinction if you look at candidates purely by "what certs they have received".
I should probably also mention that despite having went on MS and Apple training courses I am actually a *nix guy