Discussion on:

10 fundamental differences between Linux and Windows

Maybe you meant that to be included in #2, as the discussion of licensing does discuss purchasing.

I have paid MS a lot of money over the years for just a single copy (at a time) of windows.

I have downloaded and installed many more versions and distros of Linux in a shorter time. I have yet to spend more than the cost of the CDs that I burn the ISOs to. (And using re-writables means that I don't have to re-spend that money too.)

Not having unlimited funds, I find the cost of the OS to be fundamental.

I benefit greatly from the freedom to throw nearly any Linux based OS at a new VM or hardware box on a whim. Having developed ethics back in the day, I'm not so free with my Windows install disk; you don't have to respect the license, you just have to follow it.

At the same time, I think the cost is less of an issue. It's important to those who think "see, Linux isn't free" is somehow evidence that the OS is not suited to various uses. Other than that, it's really not worth focusing on the money part too much with all the other benefits available. Most distributions are free of cost but there are distributions that carry a paid license. I think Red Hat Enterprise carries a cost though Fedora does not. Mandriva provides One and Free at no cost but Power User has a license cost to support the patent licensing and other costs involved.

It's a big contrast to Windows licensing robbery but overall, it's just one point along side many others. Thank goodness I have licenses for both though; only one OS on a machien would be very boring.

How pointlessly rude was that, we are all interested in technology and enjoy what we do.

There are around 133000 MCSE's for 2003 http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/certified.mspx , and im sure none of them fit the stereotype (well apart from the braindumpers who we all hate) you are trying to make out.

MCSE is a lot of exams and commitment, to take, and MS do make it clear what each person should have in the way of experience when it comes to taking these exams.

I think when we look at it, MS is a soft target for the Linux fanboys due to it being the market leader, some of the criticism is deserved lots of it not, but all software has bugs, potential for flaws and room for improvement, whether its from Microsoft, Apple, Cisco, the Linux community or your average web programmer.

The successful people learn to do the best with what they have and apply these systems to different situations.

But were you trying to reply to my post?

My comments were strictly about the cost of purchasing the OS (MS, pay over and over for each upgrade, Linux, mostly free)

Was this rude to point out?

Not that it relates, but I also use Windows and took the MCSE exams as well. A cert is a cert, and is a benchmark saying, "look, I have passed a test on this technology." It does not say, "I am great!" or "Hire me!"

Based on the context it looks like he meant to post to the original article.

Sorry about that, I have no idea how that post ended up as a reply to you (i had it open in the main thread).

Oh well lol

"(MS, pay over and over for each upgrade, Linux, mostly free)"

That "mostly free" comes with a bigger price than you might think. Hardware purchases (yes, many will have to go and buy hardware that is supported in Linux) and the purchase of support, if you are using Linux in a production environment.

In the bleeding edge consumer component market, sure; printers and game hardware can cause support grief.

In the server and business hardware markets, what is not being supported?

I just priced an IBM rack box for a client and I can't imagine there being support issues with Red Hat and Suse both being offered as preinstalled OS.

This is actually a serious question as I'd be interested to keep any unsupported hardware in mind for future client needs.

IBM is not the best example when comes about hardware support for Linux. They design all the machines considering Linux as a potential OS for them.
Some really small companies needing a server - let's say Linux, may prefer to purchase a noname server or, even, to build one from scratch. As bad this idea may be, it is still used. Here is where one may encounter hardware compatibility problems installing Linux.

For server hardware form scratch build, I'd expect just as little support issues. I know what platform I'm building towards so I'd select hardware components that are supported in the first place.

Dell, I'd expect there rack boxes to work just fine also being that they offer a "no OS installed" option for cross platform and support Ubuntu.

The only place I see it being a real issue is if your forced to use specific existing and obscure hardware. For a server box or workststion, you don't need any obscure hardware unless it's a specialized need like a CAD workstation.

So, the question comes around full circle again. What server hardware still has support issues and why would one be forced to choose those unsupported components?

(I personally prefer to speak the only language business understands and vote with my wallet; no support for multiple platforms, no money for them.)

So, what you're saying is that the 7 year old desktop in my living room which is currently running Ubuntu 10.10 (most recent version), the 8 year old laptop which is running SimplyMepis, also in my living room, the 6 year old laptop which I installed LinuxMint on for a neighbor and the 7 year old desktop also running Linux Mint I provided for one of my other neighbors all had to have new hardware just to work? I don't remember doing that for any of them.

All hardware was supported out of the box. In fact, the Epson printer I set up on my home network was also supported on all of them.

A MCSE credential does in fact implies the message of " I am great and you should hire me!"

Head hunters on job site such as monster.com looks for first thing on a resume is certification to fill-in spots they have opening. the ones without certs are then filtered out.

There are a lot of very experienced and skilled techs who's resumes get tossed out by the HR filters because they don't have the applicable five character string combination that the HR/Headhunter recognizes. When you get a market over saturated by underskilled paper certs, the certified people who are good get lost in the mess and the uncert'd people who are good get ignored.

I have my weaknesses but I know what I'm good at also and I've watched a few people with half my skill take a job who's posting was basically a summary of my own resume.

All you are saying is that the obstacle is people. Well, in fact, people are also the answer. When a cert is not the thing you want, then you had better have a good network of people who know you and your skill. Word of mouth is better than any cert. The cert is the front door. Just like a college degree. If you are that good, somebody knows it. The more people that know it, the better your street cred. Mr. Gates himself had enough street cred that he didn't have a cert or degree to get where he is.

Sometimes you have to make a trail rather than follow the road well travelled.

Anyone I work with for more than five minutes inevitably asks; "why don't you work up there in IT?" Yet, the IT side shows no interest when I approach management or HR. My skills do speak for me far louder than my big mouth. This results in a rather frustrating situation more than opportunities through networking. Everybody knows somebody in conversation but never when it's time to talk seriously.

So, here I am now clawing at any hobby work I can get to maintain, grow and demonstrait my skill. I've a few interesting projects on the go as a result but not with enterprise class business and the inevitable HR filtering agents.

Excuse me, but that's bloody insane. Bill Gates didn't have street credit - there was no street. He was part of a group of kids back in the 70s who shared a vision. They made the street. And today, from that group, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are the only two names I still hear bandied about.

There was a time not too long ago, when applicants often had an opportunity to demonstrate or at least describe their skills. Today it's different. With applications and resumes being submitted almost entirely online, HR managers often do look only for certifications. If your skills are good enough to get you certified, then get it. A lot of the posts here sound like an elite group of techs that are bucking the system, and absolutely refuse to get certified, just to prove a point. In the end, a few of you might get hired or promoted based on your "street credit," but the rest are merely going to add to the unemployment rate.

I can tell you, from my own personal experience ten years ago - yes, that far back - that knowing your stuff is not enough to get you hired. I interviewed for five different IT positions in a year's time, and was turned down every time. There were around 20 people who eventually filled those five positions, and I met about half of them. The ones I met (some of whom were not qualified or prepared for the demands of the job) were dumbfounded why I wasn't one of them, and equally dumbfounded as to how many of them managed to get in, as they didn't know their ascii from a hole in the ground.

True, word of mouth can be a powerful ally, but only if you have a connection to the few people that matter. Word of mouth is good if the right people hear it, but that certification after your name in the title on your resume will catch their eye, even if the word of mouth misses their ears.

Last year our company was looking for a Cisco guy. I had mentioned it to one of my friends who has a CCNP. Company policy says that all resumes have to go into the online system. He input the resume and when we asked HR for the resume they said he wasn't qualified because he only had a CCNP when we wanted a CCNA. About the only thing HR knows is initals.

When I applied for an application coordinators job I had to translate all my previous military and private sector experience into initials and terms that HR were looking for even though I said the same thing they did not recognize the similarities or MILspeak. I had no competition but had not someone alerted me to the lack of understanding on HR's part I would not have gotten that job which lead to my current one.

A cert only means you can pass a test on paper not that you can actually do something. I have known folks with enough paper that you could do the walls in a five bedroom house but they can't do the job. Or they become so high and mighty that they don't work, just pontificate, and pass the work down to the inferior classes. I look for experience and basically ignore papers or pedigrees.

So I guess that's 133000 MCSE's that will now need to shell out for the new generation of Microsoft certs now.

used to be a certification meant something.

now, it's just a tag to go after your name to make it look like you're educated well.

if i had the notion (and money), i'd go buy some hardware, software, and about 25 books and get every cert that MS and Cisco offer and have more letters after my name than are in my full birth name.

i read 3 monster sized Novell books in 1995 in 2 days and got my CNA.

i do actually have respect for the Cisco certs. they are not the easiest to get.

but MS certs are a joke, according to my buddy's who got them.

i'll just go cert-less until it gets me $20k a year more, or it's required by a job and they pay for me to have it.

.. but I can justify the cost of a book much easier than the cost of the exam that follows. I've read lots of text books but only written a few cert exams.

Sadly, in the security industry you can't even get an introduction unless you have CISSP after your name around these parts. I'm willing be accept that it may be just me but many letters sent out, no responses yet; nobody cares if you know what your talking about without the blessed piece of paper.

i wonder what piece of common knowledge in the IT executive circles is proof that the tag after your name means more than someone who has 5-10 years experience actually doing the work?

just amazes me how corporations stay afloat nowadays with their hiring practices.

I went back to doing hobby work on the side just to have something other than "Business Side" possitions listed. It also focuses my self learning rather than jumping from or too whichever topic takes my interest from week to week.

I've more reason to be hopeful these days though after taking the time to better understand the market rather than just the technologies and details.

I try to keep from doing any kind of work from my profession at home. I read up on stuff, and learn still. But, 9-10 hours at the office in a day is enough for me.

As for business, I'm working on starting my own in about a year or two. I have a business model that, with the proper business growth in 12 months, will make me six figures after the first year.

Lucky I know how to do accounting and all the people at offices where i need licenses and permits. That saves me lawyer and accountants fees lol

On the other side, I'd love to be paid for my play. Heck, I realy should have a rack at home for what I do as recreation. If my eight hours a day was dedicated to more of my skill set, I'd only be doing recreation on my machines at home.

Hopefully it will continue as it has for school and work until now. I spend the day doing what is needed for work infront of a machine. When I get home, the first thing outside of family time I want to do is sit down infront of my own machine. The box is only a window display; it's the long list of things I'm doing through that window that make it all different though it looks like the same button pushing to non-techs.

Hopefully your venture goes well when you start it up. I may end up doing similar if I can get the tax implications clear in my head and organize enough work to equal my wage-slave income.

It is not the IT executives that are doing the hiring..more often it is the HR manager who hires head hunters to do the hiring first and filtering people out. The people in the first two stages have no idea if you talk techie to them and what you have done in the last 5-10 years. They are more likely to call you up first if you have a piece of cert paper. Just like people with a college degree is more likely to get hired for the same. To me, my college education provided minimal real-life skills, but getting honors on GPA and a degree help me scored a decent paying job just like the way the cert has done for me.

Well, HR generally has to get the "spec" for the job from the hiring department. That usually comes from management (sometimes with input from other departments' managers, and their senior staff).

As for college degree...

Well, I got mine in a CS dept. that was strictly Unix.

Got out of school, and everything around was Windows 3.11 development or DOS batch...or any one of the weird mainframes that companies/hospitals bought in my hometown lol.

Everything Windows I know...I taught myself from books, online reading, or pointers from people...or just messing around.

My degree really did me no good whatsoever.

"used to be a certification meant something."

BS. It used to mean squat because of all the jokers who would cram for the exam, then remember nothing. I've worked with these people; they put their little MCSE insignias on all of their letterhead and email signatures, but ask them a question and they "will have to get back to you on that" because they need to research for answers the same as the rest of us.

I was on a team of 7 with the other 6 being MS certified. I did most of the work, so all of their certs meant absolutely nothing to me.

I recently listen to a talk given by a CISO who actually has a "not a CISSP" pin he like to wear to industry membership meetings. Seems even that cert has taken a hit with all the CISSP now retraining to become employable again.

Same as the MCSE certs ten years ago when the market was oversaturated with paper certs killing off the knowledgable certs along with them.

It has been a long time since *most* certs have had real value.

A friend of mine was bored at work so he decided to read through the MCSE books and went and got his certification. This was over 10 years ago.

He freely admits he has only once installed Windows Server and knows very little about actually administering Windows systems.

Too many certifications are more about making $ certifying people instead of being about making sure you actually can do the job the certificate implies. Hence the Dilbert cartoon character saying, "I SUMMON THE VAST POWER OF CERTIFICATION!" Followed by, "This is embarrassing -- that's all I remember from the classes."

Why not go and get the certs and have done with it?

If there is nothing to it, then it should be easy for you -- right?

To be honest, I've heard just about every excuse in the book why people don't get any certifications -- most of the time it's just plain laziness or ignorance that is the cause.

The facts are very simple -- if you want to get a job, and the jobs require it -- you can either get it or kiss the job goodbye.

But for god's sake -- quit whining and crying about how the world is unfair, HR is stupid, bla bla bla bla.

If you are in the Microsoft world, certifications are VERY important and WILL earn you between 25% to 50% more money -- add that up over the course of your career before whining and crying about how expensive the exams or books are.

YOU ARE YOUR OWN CAREER MANAGER.

If you are serious about your career and want to advance professionally -- then take care of business and get whatever the industry demands. Today it may be certs, tomorrow something else -- but whatever it is YOU must be proactive and do the work.

Simple example: Uncertified trainer teaching Microsoft Office: $200 per day (if you are lucky). Microsoft Certified Trainer teaching certified courses - $500+ per day.

Do the math and see how long it would take to pay off the certification.

For the Linux dudes in the audience, I'm afraid you are pretty much screwed because there is no comparable certification path.

Too many distributions of everything and the 'vendor-neutral' certifications like CompTIA are pretty much a joke -- definitely 'entry-level'.

People may argue with this post, but I'm living proof that certification PAYS big time. With over 40 Microsoft (and other industry certs) over the course of more than 10 years, I enjoyed having my billing rates skyrocket while the process of actually studying and doing the certifications gave me the technical skills to excel at any project.

Unfortunately, the nay-sayers are typically in the in the "category of ignorance" of either never having taken ANY kind of certification, having tried one many years ago (when they were much easier), or who (as mentioned previously) are too lazy to pursue one.

Just remember that the next time an H1-B comes in and takes your job. Don't be angry with the H1-B -- be angry at yourself for being so easily replaced.

Please, tell us what current projects or future employment goals are causing you personal frustration so we can respond as you have here by tossing salt at them for you.

Why not just rush out and pick up those certs; money. You have to get the job that pays so you have the budget to pay through the nose for the certification content, potentially classes and finally the exam. Care to forward over your sponsorship cheque to keep my family fed while I take a week off my day job to "just go out and get the certs".

Perhaps you have friends in the certificating organizations that will happily wave the requirements of "X years of documented experience and endorsement of a current certification holder"?

After that, will you be forwarding me your letter of support that will somehow magically negate my need for documented experience?

It's not the skills, knowledge or lifetime of undocumented experience that's the problem. It's the beurocracy of the certification processes and mindsets like the one you've just demonstrated here.

Usually your busy starting crap over superficial ideas about nationality. I'm not even sure what puts your comment and writing tone a beyond a shade above trolling.

Don't worry Neon, you're not alone in your thoughts.

I don't know what you are babbling about regarding 'frustration' -- because my current and new projects are incredibly exciting and allow me to travel the world and make an incredibly nice living.

However, to get to this point required a lot of hard work and time -- something many people these days are unwilling to invest.

Is money the ONLY reason stopping you from getting certified? Or is that just an excuse?

Let me enlighten you with a little story...

Back 12 years ago, I'd just been fired from my IT job -- couldn't keep up the 16 hour days any longer. Without an income, lost the house, lost the car, got divorced, went bankrupt -- effectively had to start from ZERO.

Now, with no income and no rich family to support me, I couldn't just go out and take the $14,000 MCSE program as some of my friends had done. However, I was able to BARTER my skills with a local training center -- in exchange for teaching uncertified courses -- they'd let me sit in on the certified ones.

As a result, after doing this twice, the contract instructor who was teaching the courses hired me for his own company and helped me pay for my first few exams to get certified.

In exchange, he got a very reliable instructor for much less than he would have paid otherwise. I was happy to work for less because I was pushed to advance.

Another example, one of my students could only attend courses on-line because of a debilitating illness. She couldn't even leave the house for more than the few hours it would take to attend training.

However, despite incredible handicaps, she completed her MCSD and with 2 years established her own software development firm and now employs over 20 full-time programmers.

SO, when I hear people who HAVE a job whine about what it takes for exams, books or whatever -- I don't have a lot of pity.

Compared with a lot of people in the world, you are probably one of the most advantaged and privileged ones. Everything is at your fingertips -- from the next-day delivery of Amazon books - to a training center on every street corner.

In other places, even FINDING a course or book in English can be impossible. In other countries, people are getting certifications that cost as much money as they make in an entire month.

It also irks me to hear people whine about how their employer won't pay for their exams or training. "I'll show that lousy company!", they say, "just to spite them, I won't GET any certifications or training."

What kind of attitude is that?

I'm an old fart in the IT world -- am just this year going to finish my Master's degree in IT Management. WHY? Because the jobs I want REQUIRE it. As simple as that.

No amount of whining or crying how unfair or 'beauroctatic' he world is will change anything. As mentioned in another post -- you have the choice of either meeting the requirements or passing on the opportunity.

>Perhaps you have friends in the
>certificating organizations that will
>happily wave the requirements of "X years
>of documented experience and endorsement of
>a current certification holder"?

Are you saying that you are unhappy just because you don't meet the requirements and expect them to slide you through?

I hate to break it to you, but just because you WANT something does not mean that you are READY or QUALIFIED to get it.

That requirement sounds like for the CISSP certification -- maybe you'd better start with the Network+ and Security+ and then get the required experience before thinking about it?

Back in the 'old days', it was called 'paying your dues'. Nobody these days seems either willing to pay their dues or take responsibility for themselves or their own advancement.

Constructive criticism is welcome but what you did was provide a completely unnecessary dismissive backhand.

Tech is my passion and the one topic I dedicate myself to happily and obsessively. Willing to put in the time; You bet. Willing to start at the bottom as the server room janitor and work my way up; sure thing (provided my family remains fed). Willing to take crap from the self-righteous who makes no attempts at diplomacy or understanding; not a chance on that one.

If you have something constructive ad beneficial to share then by all means; have out with it. I'm open to any tips from the professionals that come before me.

What your current posts do though is simply spot the favor of a professional lower on the latter than yourself and give them a few kicks in the teeth. I'm sure you feel much better about yourself in doing so of course.

So, again, what things in your life cause you frustration so the rest of us can return the favor and provide you with some backhanded and dismissive "tips". Should I start making personal and insulting accusations about your divorce and past financial difficulties? Is that really going to help you in any way or inspire you to see my point of view?

(edit to add) after rereading your post.

I'd also like to add that I'm perfectly willing to fulfill the applicant requirements for various certifications which will actually benefit my professional development. I'm not saying "boo, life is not fair" at all. The point is that one can?t just show up for the exam and write even if they have the knowledge to do so; I don?t mean paper cert memorization but actual knowledge of what and why.

The point is, there are more variables than just "willing or unwilling to do a bit of work". You know far too little about me and my history to make these snap judgments about me.

But what do I know, I've only been at this since shortly after I learned to walk and am still highly in demand outside the job market I'm currently limited too for variables beyond your insinuated "lazy complainer" reasons.

If you'd like to discus the topic civilly and provide tips which are beneficial then I'm am all ears. You need only to step down off your pedestal, leave out the yelling caps crap and drop the passive aggressive BS.

Until then and with all due respect, please feel free to not respond further.

"For the Linux dudes in the audience, I'm afraid you are pretty much screwed because there is no comparable certification path."

Thus another Microsoftie tells us that unless it's M$, we are screwed. Funny, the CCNA is probably the hardest cert in the industry. I don't see M$ in their name. What about the SCSA? Sun may not be M$ (thank God) but it's highly respected. CompTIA's A+ is definitely entry level, but the Linux+ and the Security+ seem to me to carry some weight. I guess you aren't aware that Red Hat has certs as well.

Look, I'm not complaining with anyone else's decisions. I know how much MCSE's can expect to make ... and I know how often you have to retake the MCSE so M$ can make some more money off you. But just because you like your cert doesn't mean there aren't other choices, and good choices. As YOU said, "if you want to get a job, and the jobs require it -- you can either get it or kiss the job goodbye." Good advice, and it applies to all the jobs I'm interested in that don't require MCSEs. YMMV

that there are certs that have nothing to do with MS, and MS is just one area of IT.

I stand by the statement, and as I said in my post -- that for LINUX.

"there is no comparable certification path."

>Thus another Microsoftie tells us that
>unless it's M$, we are screwed.

That's not what I said at all. Please READ and COMPREHEND.

CCNA, SCSA are NOT LINUX.

>Funny, the CCNA is probably the hardest
>cert in the industry.

That's gotta be a joke -- right? I studied for that one and was just about to take it, when the contract finished and I didn't need it. I found it not much more difficult than Security+ and Network+ together -- certainly a lot LESS difficult than some of the big Microsoft 'scenario' questions.

>but the Linux+ and the Security+ seem to me
>to carry some weight.

I can't comment on Linux+, but if you look at the job boards and search for it -- you'll be hard pressed to find too many businesses looking for it.

Security+ -- also a joke. I've taught that certification course to hundreds of people and had big issues with it. That's a prime example of an exam where it is not only possible, but PROBABLE you have huge numbers of 'paper' graduates.

>I guess you aren't aware that Red Hat has
>certs as well.

No, I'm QUITE aware of them -- however, that represents only a tiny fraction of the entire Linux market. Herein leads to my statement at the top!

The Linux market is totally fractured. With over 400 'popular distributions' and an almost infinite number of different combinations of applications and versions -- there is NO WAY that a 'standard' Linux certification of any complexity could ever exist -- it would never hit any kind of viable target market.

In contrast, out-of-the-box, Microsoft servers give you everything you need to build the basic infrastructure -- from DHCP, DNS and Active Directory to Web and Application servers.

Creating a certification program becomes possible because you don't have to fracture the certification process.

Additionally, who would write and administer certification exams for all the thousands of different Linux applications?

Hell, for 99.9% of the products you can't get coherent, user-friendly documentation let alone expect the developers to write something as challenging as decent exam questions. Who would pay for all that?

>and I know how often you have to retake the
>MCSE so M$ can make some more money off
>you.

Do you really expect to take one exam on one product and not have to upgrade yourself for the rest of your life?

That would be nice, but in the real world -- particularly the world of technology -- things work a lot differently.

First, the exam prices for Microsoft exams are LESS than Cisco and many others.

My University courses cost just as much as any Microsoft course.

And, as a matter of fact, Microsoft ADJUSTS the price of exams to match the earning power of the region -- so for example, here in Russia, where salaries are 1/4 those of the USA -- the exams are also reduced in price -- previously $25, but more recently $50 each.

Unlike the wonderland world of FOSS, in the commercial world, someone has to PAY to develop courseware and exams.

Prometric and VUE testing centers are also commercial businesses -- so there is no free lunch.

Second, you don't have to retake anything if you don't want to -- UNLIKE CISSP, Cisco and other certification programs -- Microsoft certifications are linked to products and versions and don't have annual or tri-annual renewal requirements -- they are as useful as the product is.

Plenty of people still have an MCSE on NT-4 but didn't bother to upgrade if they didn't have to. Other people who need to upgrade can do so -- often with just a single exam as for the NT-4 to Windows 2000 upgrade or with just a few as for the Windows 2000 to Windows 2003 upgrade.

I got my MCSE in 1997, upgraded just 3 times in over 10 years -- that is NOT asking for very much from the student/test-taker.

YOU need to take responsibility for your own education. If you check the job boards and want the fancy job title but you don't meet the requirements -- YOU HAVE TWO CHOICES:

1. Forget about that fancy new job.
2. Educate yourself and qualify for it.

What could be more fair than that?

From your thread title, "If all the posters to this thread are so smart..." So, you start off by telling us all how we aren't as smart as you.

Then you say, "there is no comparable certification path." Well, that's one opinion, as like a$$h01es, we each have ONE. You may be happy with M$, but I've found plenty of jobs which require more, like SCSA, or combined with non-M$ certs. My point is there is more to the world than M$. That doesn't make you wrong to choose your own path - only wrong when you are so snooty as to dump on anyone else's choice.

You say MCSE's scenario certs were tougher. Personally, I found MCSE was full of rote memorization, whereas CCNA actually expected you to solve real-world problems. Maybe it's just that I'm not so good at fact memorization. As always, YMMV. I'm not so stuck up that I have to put someone else's skill sets and choices down.

(No, I haven't taken a Linux cert yet. I may, or I may not. My choice and I don't whine about the choices I make. I've been a Solaris admin for years more than I have done Linux.)

"I can't comment on Linux+, but if you look at the job boards and search for it -- you'll be hard pressed to find too many businesses looking for it." I haven't had any trouble finding jobs for which Linux+ was either "desirable" or an acceptable substitute for a different named cert. YMMV

"The Linux market is totally fractured. With over 400 'popular distributions' and an almost infinite number of different combinations of applications and versions -- there is NO WAY that a 'standard' Linux certification of any complexity could ever exist -- it would never hit any kind of viable target market." Again, your OPINION, and it's colored by your M$ Fanboy outlook. Knowing UNIX has gotten me two jobs that required Linux experience. Maybe there are minor differences, but a person who knows a VERSION of UNIX/LINUX is not unlike a person who knows Win2000 doing Win XP. It's close, even if not a perfect fit.

"Do you really expect to take one exam on one product and not have to upgrade yourself for the rest of your life?" No, but I don't appreciate M$ scrapping an OS to put out a new one and demand a new set of fees for memorizing a new set of factoids. My last course was in Solaris 8, but that hasn't prevented me from learning Solaris 10 and Linux, nor has it prevented me from getting jobs.

"My University courses cost just as much as any Microsoft course." And if you think M$ classes are equal to any University's curriculum, then you went to the wrong school.

Look, I'm delighted you have had success after having such a problem in the middle of your career. Now, when are you going to get over it and quit blaming everyone else for not having the same career you had? And if that doesn't get the point across, I still stand by Neon's statement, "Don't be an A$Z."

Sorry.

>From your thread title, "If all the posters
>to this thread are so smart..." So, you
>start off by telling us all how we aren't
>as smart as you.

That's not what I said.

How about "to those people who are whining about not being able to get a job because they don't meet the prerequisites demanded or who think certifications are 'easy' and 'worthless'" -- would that make you feel better?

We hear a lot of complaining that HR departments are stupid, hiring managers are stupid, it's nothing but bureaucratic nonsense, it costs too much -- or whatever.

I'm sure you can think of a million other reasons why people shouldn't/couldn't/wouldn't bother with certification as a form of professional development -- but the simple and undeniable fact remains -- for many jobs, certifications are REQUIRED. PERIOD. And no amount of excuses, whining or complaining is going to change that.

>My point is there is more to the world than
>M$. That doesn't make you wrong to choose
>your own path - only wrong when you are so
>snooty as to dump on anyone else's choice.

Again, your reading comprehension is lacking. Please go back and re-read not just my posts, but the ones I was responding to and see if you can figure it out.

I didn't slam anyone else's certification choices -- I merely stated that on the Linux/UNIX side of the fence you have SEVERE LIMITS in what certifications are available, and due to the fractured base of technologies -- on the demand itself.

>You say MCSE's scenario certs were tougher.
>Personally, I found MCSE was full of rote
>memorization, whereas CCNA actually
>expected you to solve real-world problems.

And when did you do the MCSE exam? 2000 or earlier? Obviously, you've never done any of the case study exams or simulations where you ARE expected to solve real world problems.

>Knowing UNIX has gotten me two jobs that
>required Linux experience. Maybe there are
>minor differences, but a person who knows a
>VERSION of UNIX/LINUX is not unlike a
>person who knows Win2000 doing Win XP. It's
>close, even if not a perfect fit.

I hate to break your bubble, but knowing XP or being certified on it as a client operating system has almost nothing to do with the Windows 2000 server side of the equation.

Statements like you made would indicate that the only Windows knowledge you have was around the NT-4 time when things like Active Directory didn't exist and the exams were easier.

>"Do you really expect to take one exam on
>one product and not have to upgrade
>yourself for the rest of your life?" No, >but I don't appreciate M$ scrapping an OS
>to put out a new one and demand a new set
>of fees for memorizing a new set of
>factoids.

Your logic makes no sense -- first you say that the OS's are all the same -- or close enough that it shouldn't matter -- now you say that you object to memorizing new things?

While you may be an expert in your own path, these kind of statements demonstrate you know painfully little about the Microsoft side of the equation. As they say, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".

>My last course was in Solaris 8, but that
>hasn't prevented me from learning Solaris
>10 and Linux, nor has it prevented me from
>getting jobs.

Anyone can 'get jobs' -- the US economy currently averages about 5.5% unemployment -- so for someone to brag about being in the 94.5th percentile of the population isn't so special.

What you WILL find is if you want a GOOD job or contract -- one that PAYS TOP DOLLAR -- then better look at the requirements. In the UK, Prince 2, ITIL, MCSE, CISSP are very much in demand -- as is a University degree.

Like it or lump it.


>"My University courses cost just as much as
>any Microsoft course." And if you think M$
>classes are equal to any University's
>curriculum, then you went to the wrong
>school.

Actually, again you are horribly outdated.

In fact, my University RECOGNIZES the Microsoft (and other industry-standard) certifications towards a certificate or degree.

This is an officially accredited, highly respected Australian university -- not some fake diploma mill.

Read all about it:

http://www.itmasters.com.au/

Revolutionary programs like this are EXACTLY what has been needed to give IT professionals credentials they can really benefit from.

Of course, there will ALWAYS be people around who "don't need no stinkin certs" or diplomas to 'get a job'. If they are happy with the jobs they get -- then good for them.

However, there is more to being an IT professional than just 'experience' -- a few people just haven't caught on to that small detail yet.

You certainly don't practice it. You practice Obfuscation, something the M$ world is fond of.

Let's ask 1000 people: If a person starts off a post with, "If all the posters to this thread are so smart...", is it a put down? Wanna bet some of your salary on the result?

"I merely stated that on the Linux/UNIX side of the fence you have SEVERE LIMITS in what certifications are available, and due to the fractured base of technologies" I'm limited only by my own choices, not the confused and hostile views of a Microsoftie. And "Fractured" is another of your snooty, self-superior comments, as well as being untrue. Linux is not M$ and comparisons which pretend it is are deliberately structured by people unable to recognize the value of the other side. (NO, I don't like M$ and I'm glad to be doing what I am doing. But that doesn't mean I can't recognize that the business world likes their security blanket.)

Ok, I did the MCSE back in 2002, when the questions were like, "Given Win2000 and programs A, B, and C, how much memory does your computer need? Rote memorization, and I'll be damned if I can figure out why 2 megabytes is a better answer than 1.5 megabytes. MAYBE M$ saw what Cisco was doing and copied it. Copying IS what M$ is best at.

"I hate to break your bubble". Don't flatter yourself, dude. You are just another opinionated twit out to prove how much he knows. I ***NEVER*** said anything about XP having anything to do with Win2000 Server. Reread you part about Comprehension and tell me how you missed that. What I was getting at is that operating systems in a series or cousins have a tendency to do things in a certain way. That doesn't mean knowing Win2000 makes you an XP expert, but it is better than knowing nothing. And the results are better in the Unix/Linux market, where the distributions are not deliberately obfuscated to pretend you are getting something new and different for your money. (And before you whine that I'm wrong, check the threads on Vista complaints, where people are unhappy because functionality was changed for no reason other than to just be different.)

"a little knowledge is a dangerous thing". A statement which describes you exactly.

Look, I haven't got the time or concern to continue responding to your whine. You had a bad spot in your life and you overcame it. Unfortunately, having had a bad spot, you now think that everyone who doesn't do it your way is doing it wrong. The world is full of people who have different challenges than you did. You only have a hammer and every problem looks like a nail to you. When are you going to get over it and live your life instead of whining about how hard you had it and how anyone can get out the same way you did?

"if i had the notion (and money), i'd go buy some hardware, software, and about 25 books and get every cert that MS and Cisco offer and have more letters after my name than are in my full birth name."

When I first got on the net back in the mid 90's I didn't get much respect cuz I'm frum Texas and bigotry agin Southerners is huge in cyberspace. So, to gain a hearing, I put my real letters after my name and a few I made up to mock the whole nonsense. No one questioned the made up ones cuz they didn't want to make an inbred Redneck look smarter then they were. Only one lad called me prideful because the letters were longer than my name. Then I told him what they all meant and why I did it and he ate 'umble pie. Don't mess with Texas, heah?

With lines like this:

"And if a user does get the Windows command line up and running, how useful is it really?"

I really question the objectivity of the article. I am beginning to see this as yet another article to "stir the pot" because like sex, emotion sells.

As you said, successful people tend to learn to do the best they can with what they have...

I totally agree with kevin@...

Why do people bother forcing users and IT professionals to choose over linux or windows. Each platform has its own pros and cons. A good IT pro should keeps the good of both world. We have servers in two data centers, half and half mix of linux and windows server. My Linux tech and all users loves our Exchange messaging systems and all windows tech love the openness of linux server to be able to do any type of testing of app on open linux server such our global voip phone servers, which allows users from multiple office around the global to dial just extension number to reach a coworker in Asia or UK.

I am a MCSE myself, without Windows I wouldn't had such a good career.

What I want to know is

1. DETAILS about getting printers, scanners, and other peripherals to work. Will the scanner I bought last year work, for example?

2. DESCRIPTION of HOW the OS works. I assume it does not have a registry - but how are things stored. Is removing an app as simple as deleting its folder - is EVERYTHING about an app kept in its folder - as it SHOULD BE?

3. What is the file system like - how is it structured?

4. Can I have Linux remember folder size, position, and type of display for every folder?

5. How is fragmentation of a hard drive different from Windows?

What I want to know are the practical things that will affect my day-to-day use of my PC.
This is what is missing from EVERY article I've ever read about Linux; they all cover the same old, same old, without the information that I really need to know to switch.

Q1. DETAILS about getting printers, scanners, and other peripherals to work. Will the scanner I bought last year work, for example?

That will depend on how wedded the hardware manufacturer was to MS. If they designed the hardware to use the industry standards then it will just plug-n-play with Linux. If it was designed to be out of the box compatible with Windows without a driver, then you'll need a Linux driver. Some hardware companies make them, some don't you'll need to see if someone made one. This problem is due to some companies catering to MS and not the consumer or the industry standards.


Q2. DESCRIPTION of HOW the OS works. I assume it does not have a registry - but how are things stored. Is removing an app as simple as deleting its folder - is EVERYTHING about an app kept in its folder - as it SHOULD BE?

In most cases everything related to a an application is in the folder except for the desktop icon and the menu hot link, but both of these are easily cleaned up. This is so because that's how most third party Linux apps are set up to be installed. Some do use shared libraries, in which case the shared libraries will be stored elsewhere so other apps can use them, and they cause no trouble if left there.

Q3. What is the file system like - how is it structured?

This can vary now, but from a user stand point you can access and use them just like you do in Windows through the gui. In recent years some effort has been made to make the file system work like the Windows one as more people are comfortable with that, but some still sue the original Linux style where the file is stored in the one location and links created instead of extra copies.

Q4. Can I have Linux remember folder size, position, and type of display for every folder?

Yes you can in some versions of Linux, my Kubuntu Linux does all this. Linux is very responsive to user requests and some versions have been written to be like Windows in this regards to suit the users.

Q5. How is fragmentation of a hard drive different from Windows?

Fragmentation isn't really that different, just the file accessing method is a bit different. In Windows you have a File Allocation Table that lists the drive storage locations and what's placed in each drive. Lose that and you lose the data, deleting a file only results in the list in the FAT being removed until something is recorded over the data itself. An error in the FAT can see data over written. In Linux the common file system is to have the location of the next section of stored data listed at the end of the section before it so you get an immediate link across without having to go back to the FAT. Some of the newer file systems work differently to this.

Q6 What I want to know are the practical things that will affect my day-to-day use of my PC. This is what is missing from EVERY article I've ever read about Linux; they all cover the same old, same old, without the information that I really need to know to switch.

Most articles are intended for non computer literate users or highly computer literate users. The semi literate users are left out until such time as they spend some money and buy a book on the basics of Linux or do a basic Linux course - much like most semi literate Windows users had to do some basic research when they first started with behind the interface Windows work. Much can be learned by just playing with the systems or using the various help files you get with them. Much information is also available on the Internet.

I hope this has helped a bit.

As to why you need to switch, I can only answer as to why I did. Windows Guaranteed Advantage kept trashing my system because I frequently changed hardware, I got fed up with the constant down time to re-certify my system with MS as I had to call them up all the time. I also found the costs of software an issue and the lack of compatibility with older software, hardware, and files a major problem too. The basic kernel and access design in Linux is a lot more secure as it doesn't have the dozens of deliberate back doors to give MS apps and malicious code easy access to the kernel by passing around the security features. Basic security is tougher and easier to use than any MS has.

I would definitely agree with cost. with each Redmond system costing a minimum of one hundred to two hundred dollars, Linux is much easier on the wallet and bank account.

God... you tried SO hard to be non-biased, and really, you were off to a wonderful start.

But... ultimately,

"Linux Geek Bias FAIL".

#1 I agree, developer types LOVE Linux. And MOST users aren't developers... they're users. Open source code means nothing to 95%... maybe more, of the people who have a daily need to use a PC or other similar electronic device. So your #1 reason is a moot point for the VAST majority of OS users.

#2 Licensing. With no license, comes no liability, and with no liability comes no real or meaningful accountability. This is a huge CORPORATE weakness for Linux, across business *broadly*. I don't disagree that Linux has a place in business, but having a closed license model with resulting reliance, liability and accountability are not necessarily NEGATIVE issues. I know there are Linux solutions to try and address this, but ultimately, this is a worry, at the least, to many organizations.

#3 Support, I think you nailed. Although I *would* suggest, that on free, online support forums, you are far less likely to run into elitist RTFM attitudes from Win32 forums than you are on a Linux forum. This is a cultural thing. The Linux OS crowd has a lot of propeller-heads that can't WAIT to crucify some noob for asking a stupid question. This attitude is less in evidence among the Win32 community. There is also an abundance of "The OS isn't the problem, your STUPIDITY is the problem" in the Linux community. It is some kind of "Defense by a strong Offense" response, if you asked me. Not to say that you can't find reasonable, pleasant, helpful individuals in the Linux community. These few (very vocal) bad apples sure make them seem few and far between, though.

#4 Man, Ubuntu... the "It Just Works" Linux distro, is still having notorious issues with Wireless cards, PCMCIA, and ATI graphics that take a sufficient level of *nix expertise to sort out, generally. I think it SEEMS like you've come a long way because you remember when things were FAR worse. From my perspective, you still have a LONG way to go in this regard, in the Linux community. Certainly far enough that it is too early to claim "It just works".

#5 Most long time Win32 Admins I know go back to DOS and Pre-Dos CLIs (AmigaOS, CP/M, and others) and still use Command Line tools on a regular basis. Through the 90s, a big complaint among Win Admins about Mac OS (pre X) were about the lack of the ability to get down into the OS at the CLI level. This particular argument always has moving targets from all sides. At one point, the *nix community was all over Windows 3.11, 95 and 98 for being just a shell on top of a CLI. What the *ell is KDE or Gnome? Don't give me that "A Windows MANAGER on top of a GRAPHICS subsystem on top of the Linux Kernel" double-talk. It is a GUI Shell over a CLI based OS. Not that I think this is a bad thing. I simply think this particular argument moves as convenient depending on the perspective of the argumentor.

#6. I love Dselect, Apt-Get, and the Debian/Ubuntu file repositories. They're cool. They're nifty. They make it real easy to find and install a ton of freeware quality applications (And some that almost rise to the polish and finish of closed-license commercial products, even). This one truly is a difference that Win32, as we know it today, can probably never deliver on. On the other hand, even with Dselect and HUGE improvement in *nix package management, it is still GENERALLY more error prone and dangerous to install a new Linux app than to run a setup.exe and click YES to a dozen defaults. And it isn't like it is HARD to find software for Win32, through whatever means you might choose. I don't know where I stand on this one. It is 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other. For every point I can think of for either approach, I can think of a counterpoint as well.

#7 Flexibility like a complex tool that you must hand assemble to your customized need on a case by case basis. Versus generalized to do almost everything well for the average person. Again, developers versus users, really. Enthusiasts versus hobbyists. Very personal decisions going on here. For the corporate workplace, the "one size fits all" approach has some obvious benefits in GENERAL.

#8. The fangs really show here. "A legion of paper certified professionals with the false sense of security that they will be forever employable". You're basically pulling back the mask to show that Linux elitist screaming, "RTFM, you effin' noob IDIOT", right here. There are also a lot of pragmatic professional realists who simply want the most simple and efficient tool to get the job done. Heck, I don't have an MCSE. But I *have* made a successful 20 year career off of Microsoft products. My approach is pragmatic, reasonable. It has nothing to do with job security. It has to do with what works best for the majority of people with the most ease of supportability.

#9. Was this an attempt at atonement after #8? Because really, this is one of the MOST significant improvements that Ubuntu introduces toward broad desktop acceptability. Linux has REALLY risen to the challenge with delivering better on removable media management.

#10. No arguments there. They are what they are. In either case, though, it might be easier to install from scratch than to try and figure out what went FUBAR. But if you are a sadomasicistic uber-nerd, Linux will gladly allow you to flog yourself as much as you want. Win32 will go, "Give up dude, it is over, get out the install disks and start from scratch. Stop beating yourself up, it isn't you... it is me".

Generally, it seems we agree, but we come to two vastly different conclusions that couldn't be further apart.