|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.cert.exams.mcse > August 2003 > 2000 vs. 2003 track
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
2000 vs. 2003 track
|
|
|
| I have just started my way to an MCSE, passing 70-210,
but was wondering what you people think, should i go ahead
and follow the 2000 track or jump to the 2003 track. Our
company currently uses 2000 but are upgrading to 2003 in
the fall/winter. I see my self venturing out to other jobs
in the future so that doesnt' matter.
what is anyone's opinion on this?
I would think 2003 would be the way to go, eventually (5
years or so) 2000 will get phased out.
thanks,
A
| |
| Clint Kennedy 2003-07-31, 12:23 pm |
| I have a very simple opinion on this matter. One thing I learned working
for a network solutions company for several years, is that the MAJORITY of
businesses resist change unless it is critical or necessary to drastically
increase productivity or save money. Having said that, I am a firm believer
that most companies running W2K, companies that spent thousands or even
millions of dollars to put this system in place, will not see tools that
make the sys admin's job easier as a reason to upgrade and spend a lot of
money all over again. I see it as this, one only has to take 2 more exams
to be certified on both W2K and W2K3. Get them both! Windows 2000 is not
going anywhere. Put yourself in the shoes of a hiring manager (which I am
now). If I have a Windows2000 network (which I do), why would I want to
hire a W2K3 MCSE that hasn't necessarily been exposed to the W2K way of
doing things when I can have a 2000 MCSE that also has knowledge of where
things are going and can help in the future? Personally, as I've said, I
think the vast majority of W2K3 customers will be those coming from NT4 (as
MS's website seems to market moreso than a W2K upgrade).
Just use a little common sense, don't listen to the fools out there. Most
people that give this awful advice have been unemployed or have started
their "own business" (laugh) because no one wants their "genius", lol. I
can spot these useless know-it-alls from a mile away. People that are
talented and truly qualified, and most importantly have the RIGHT ATTITUDE
should have no problem finding a job. Just take a 5 minute look on how many
positions are available on the job boards all around this country.
Clint
"a" <a@a.com> wrote in message
news:0eb401c35779$65b64810$a40
1280a@phx.gbl...
> I have just started my way to an MCSE, passing 70-210,
> but was wondering what you people think, should i go ahead
> and follow the 2000 track or jump to the 2003 track. Our
> company currently uses 2000 but are upgrading to 2003 in
> the fall/winter. I see my self venturing out to other jobs
> in the future so that doesnt' matter.
>
> what is anyone's opinion on this?
>
> I would think 2003 would be the way to go, eventually (5
> years or so) 2000 will get phased out.
>
> thanks,
> A
| |
| billyw 2003-07-31, 12:23 pm |
| go 2k then upgrade.
business is just coming to terms with 2k so there will be plenty chance to
look at 2k3 at a later date.
"a" <a@a.com> wrote in message
news:0eb401c35779$65b64810$a40
1280a@phx.gbl...
> I have just started my way to an MCSE, passing 70-210,
> but was wondering what you people think, should i go ahead
> and follow the 2000 track or jump to the 2003 track. Our
> company currently uses 2000 but are upgrading to 2003 in
> the fall/winter. I see my self venturing out to other jobs
> in the future so that doesnt' matter.
>
> what is anyone's opinion on this?
>
> I would think 2003 would be the way to go, eventually (5
> years or so) 2000 will get phased out.
>
> thanks,
> A
| |
| booby orr 2003-07-31, 12:23 pm |
| i say go w2k3.
billyw wrote:
> go 2k then upgrade.
> business is just coming to terms with 2k so there will be plenty chance to
> look at 2k3 at a later date.
>
> "a" <a@a.com> wrote in message
> news:0eb401c35779$65b64810$a40
1280a@phx.gbl...
>
>> I have just started my way to an MCSE, passing 70-210,
>>but was wondering what you people think, should i go ahead
>>and follow the 2000 track or jump to the 2003 track. Our
>>company currently uses 2000 but are upgrading to 2003 in
>>the fall/winter. I see my self venturing out to other jobs
>>in the future so that doesnt' matter.
>>
>>what is anyone's opinion on this?
>>
>>I would think 2003 would be the way to go, eventually (5
>>years or so) 2000 will get phased out.
>>
>>thanks,
>>A
>
>
>
| |
|
| Very well stated, after thinking this over, i think i have
come to the conclusion that i want to get my 2k first then
take the 2 exams for the 2k3.
thanks for all the input, people...
>-----Original Message-----
>I have a very simple opinion on this matter. One thing I
learned working
>for a network solutions company for several years, is
that the MAJORITY of
>businesses resist change unless it is critical or
necessary to drastically
>increase productivity or save money. Having said that, I
am a firm believer
>that most companies running W2K, companies that spent
thousands or even
>millions of dollars to put this system in place, will not
see tools that
>make the sys admin's job easier as a reason to upgrade
and spend a lot of
>money all over again. I see it as this, one only has to
take 2 more exams
>to be certified on both W2K and W2K3. Get them both!
Windows 2000 is not
>going anywhere. Put yourself in the shoes of a hiring
manager (which I am
>now). If I have a Windows2000 network (which I do), why
would I want to
>hire a W2K3 MCSE that hasn't necessarily been exposed to
the W2K way of
>doing things when I can have a 2000 MCSE that also has
knowledge of where
>things are going and can help in the future? Personally,
as I've said, I
>think the vast majority of W2K3 customers will be those
coming from NT4 (as
>MS's website seems to market moreso than a W2K upgrade).
>
>Just use a little common sense, don't listen to the fools
out there. Most
>people that give this awful advice have been unemployed
or have started
>their "own business" (laugh) because no one wants
their "genius", lol. I
>can spot these useless know-it-alls from a mile away.
People that are
>talented and truly qualified, and most importantly have
the RIGHT ATTITUDE
>should have no problem finding a job. Just take a 5
minute look on how many
>positions are available on the job boards all around this
country.
>
>Clint
>
>"a" <a@a.com> wrote in message
> news:0eb401c35779$65b64810$a40
1280a@phx.gbl...
>> I have just started my way to an MCSE, passing 70-210,
>> but was wondering what you people think, should i go
ahead
>> and follow the 2000 track or jump to the 2003 track. Our
>> company currently uses 2000 but are upgrading to 2003 in
>> the fall/winter. I see my self venturing out to other
jobs
>> in the future so that doesnt' matter.
>>
>> what is anyone's opinion on this?
>>
>> I would think 2003 would be the way to go, eventually (5
>> years or so) 2000 will get phased out.
>>
>> thanks,
>> A
>
>
>.
>
|
|
|
|
|