|
Home > Archive > alt.certification.mcse > June 2003 > Did I cheat?
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]
|
|
| Petter Børkeeiet 2003-06-21, 12:24 am |
| Hi everyone!
I passed the 70-216 approx a week ago after studying the MsPress book, doing
the MS Readiness review a lot of times and looking through the Transcender
questions I could find (for free) on the internet. I've heard that
Transcender has no braindumps, so I thought they were ok.
I noticed one strange thing: Some of the questions on the exam were exactly
the same questions as I have seen before. I investegated a bit and I could
not find the questions in the MS Readiness review. Unluckily I have deleted
the Transcender files, but I am 100 % sure the questions I recogniced were
from Transcender.
So, did I cheat on the exam?
Regards, Petter
| |
|
| a lot of people use and recommend transcender here and some say they are
harder than the real exam and some they are braindumps.. if you ask me they
are no different than braindumps! but hey i will be honest, i used
transcender for couple of exams to ONLY get a basic idea of how the exam is!
so my answer will be be no.. as long as you know the material well.
"Petter Børkeeiet" <nospam.pettbork@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:%yRIa.1127$os2.15781@news2.e.nsc.no...
> Hi everyone!
> I passed the 70-216 approx a week ago after studying the MsPress book,
doing
> the MS Readiness review a lot of times and looking through the Transcender
> questions I could find (for free) on the internet. I've heard that
> Transcender has no braindumps, so I thought they were ok.
>
> I noticed one strange thing: Some of the questions on the exam were
exactly
> the same questions as I have seen before. I investegated a bit and I could
> not find the questions in the MS Readiness review. Unluckily I have
deleted
> the Transcender files, but I am 100 % sure the questions I recogniced were
> from Transcender.
>
> So, did I cheat on the exam?
>
> Regards, Petter
>
>
| |
|
| I mentioned previously that some of the Trancender questions were word
for word to the 70-210 questions that I took several weeks ago. There
is another one that I will not mention that is even worse.
Ray
Petter Børkeeiet wrote:
> Hi everyone!
> I passed the 70-216 approx a week ago after studying the MsPress book, doing
> the MS Readiness review a lot of times and looking through the Transcender
> questions I could find (for free) on the internet. I've heard that
> Transcender has no braindumps, so I thought they were ok.
>
> I noticed one strange thing: Some of the questions on the exam were exactly
> the same questions as I have seen before. I investegated a bit and I could
> not find the questions in the MS Readiness review. Unluckily I have deleted
> the Transcender files, but I am 100 % sure the questions I recogniced were
> from Transcender.
>
> So, did I cheat on the exam?
>
> Regards, Petter
>
>
| |
| The Oracle 2003-06-21, 6:24 pm |
|
<snip>
but hey i will be honest, i used
> transcender for couple of exams to ONLY get a basic idea of how the exam
is!
So in other words you do not understand the material correctly enough so you
had to resort to some so called "practise tests" to get a feel for the
contents. And you were taking the moral high ground towards me in some
other posts earlier. My opinion eqarlier reinforced - that MCSE is worth
less than a basic food hygiene certificate displayed by every worker at
McDonalds.
I say that it is this "commercialisation" of the certification industry that
has got us into the state it is in today and why the salaries have
plummeted. When we get to the stage that an whole industry can spring up
based on giving candidates practise exam questions I thing we all know in
our heart of hearts that we are in a situation where the most desperate will
pay for these so called practise exams to get the real title on the resume.
This crazy chapter of the IT industry will soon come to a close - driven by
employers who no longer believe in these mickey mouse nonsense
qualifications.
>
> "Petter Børkeeiet" <nospam.pettbork@frisurf.no> wrote in message
> news:%yRIa.1127$os2.15781@news2.e.nsc.no...
> > Hi everyone!
> > I passed the 70-216 approx a week ago after studying the MsPress book,
> doing
> > the MS Readiness review a lot of times and looking through the
Transcender
> > questions I could find (for free) on the internet. I've heard that
> > Transcender has no braindumps, so I thought they were ok.
> >
> > I noticed one strange thing: Some of the questions on the exam were
> exactly
> > the same questions as I have seen before. I investegated a bit and I
could
> > not find the questions in the MS Readiness review. Unluckily I have
> deleted
> > the Transcender files, but I am 100 % sure the questions I recogniced
were
> > from Transcender.
> >
> > So, did I cheat on the exam?
> >
> > Regards, Petter
> >
> >
>
>
| |
| John Abreau 2003-06-21, 7:24 pm |
| the reason why i use transcender is coz initially when i started doin ms
certs, you have to think in *ms's way* when answering their exam questions.
they are so called *real world solutions*
that is one of the reason why i joined this NG back then to get more advice
on the exams.. not suprisngly lot of people recommended transcender.
cheating and studying are two different things.. well i have to admit, i'm
not one of those smart cookie like you.. so i needed some study questions..
and i'm not like those chumps who read just the answers in parrot form and
go to the exam!
ray, i do agree with you.. we had this argument before in this NG.. i dont
want to bring it up again.. from my point of view, transcenders are not like
braindumps! they are designed in a way to give you a good insight of the
exam. someone told me transcender are recommended my MS? you should
understand the difference between study question and actual exam questions..
they are different..
"The Oracle" <kojaknospam@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:bd2ng1$o9i21$1@ID-179018.news.dfncis.de...
>
> <snip>
> but hey i will be honest, i used
> > transcender for couple of exams to ONLY get a basic idea of how the exam
> is!
>
> So in other words you do not understand the material correctly enough so
you
> had to resort to some so called "practise tests" to get a feel for the
> contents. And you were taking the moral high ground towards me in some
> other posts earlier. My opinion eqarlier reinforced - that MCSE is worth
> less than a basic food hygiene certificate displayed by every worker at
> McDonalds.
>
> I say that it is this "commercialisation" of the certification industry
that
> has got us into the state it is in today and why the salaries have
> plummeted. When we get to the stage that an whole industry can spring up
> based on giving candidates practise exam questions I thing we all know in
> our heart of hearts that we are in a situation where the most desperate
will
> pay for these so called practise exams to get the real title on the
resume.
>
> This crazy chapter of the IT industry will soon come to a close - driven
by
> employers who no longer believe in these mickey mouse nonsense
> qualifications.
>
>
> >
> > "Petter Børkeeiet" <nospam.pettbork@frisurf.no> wrote in message
> > news:%yRIa.1127$os2.15781@news2.e.nsc.no...
> > > Hi everyone!
> > > I passed the 70-216 approx a week ago after studying the MsPress book,
> > doing
> > > the MS Readiness review a lot of times and looking through the
> Transcender[color
=darkred]
> > > questions I could find (for free) on the internet. I've heard that
> > > Transcender has no braindumps, so I thought they were ok.
> > >
> > > I noticed one strange thing: Some of the questions on the exam were
> > exactly
> > > the same questions as I have seen before. I investegated a bit and I
> could
> > > not find the questions in the MS Readiness review. Unluckily I have
> > deleted
> > > the Transcender files, but I am 100 % sure the questions I recogniced
> were
> > > from Transcender.
> > >
> > > So, did I cheat on the exam?
> > >
> > > Regards, Petter
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>[/color]
| |
| Maynard 2003-06-22, 12:25 am |
|
"The Oracle" <kojaknospam@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:bd2ng1$o9i21$1@ID-179018.news.dfncis.de...
>
> <snip>
> but hey i will be honest, i used
> > transcender for couple of exams to ONLY get a basic idea of how the exam
> is!
>
> So in other words you do not understand the material correctly enough so
you
> had to resort to some so called "practise tests" to get a feel for the
> contents. And you were taking the moral high ground towards me in some
> other posts earlier. My opinion eqarlier reinforced - that MCSE is worth
> less than a basic food hygiene certificate displayed by every worker at
> McDonalds.
>
> I say that it is this "commercialisation" of the certification industry
that
> has got us into the state it is in today and why the salaries have
> plummeted. When we get to the stage that an whole industry can spring up
> based on giving candidates practise exam questions I thing we all know in
> our heart of hearts that we are in a situation where the most desperate
will
> pay for these so called practise exams to get the real title on the
resume.
>
> This crazy chapter of the IT industry will soon come to a close - driven
by
> employers who no longer believe in these mickey mouse nonsense
> qualifications.
From what I have seen, certs still have value but not nearly the power they
did about three years ago when getting certain certs was better than a
degree. My position is that getting a cert will be one hurdle cleared for
some jobs requirements when HR requires a certain cert which I have seen
many times. A person needs much more than a cert for anything past entry
level. A degree and/or experience. But if a company gets burned by a bozo
with a cert, you can belive that having the same cert will be a negative on
your resume rather than a positive. Been there, seen that.
I have noticed that some cert schools have toned down the salary and job
promises that they were making not so long ago. They want a candidate to
have other qualifications before they can be enrolled.
A cert is not the golden Wonka ticket it used to be. Those days are gone for
good. It'll have value in most cases.
| |
| DenverBob 2003-06-22, 2:24 am |
| Certs are still very important. They just get you in the door (assuming you
meet other requirements as well). Companies have FINALLY awakened to the
paper certs, and they are usually filtered out quite easily in the interview
process.
We've been trying for a couple months now to hire a Sr. level Systems
Administrator at my company, and have yet to find anything even close to a
good candidate. Why? Because one of the most important requirements is
expertise in Active Directory. Most of the candidates that HR has sent
through to be interviewed by our technical team are NT 4.0 MCSEs who "claim"
expertise in AD. When our technical team (all W2K MCSEs) begin asking them
AD questions, they tend to fail miserably. The questions are not that
tough, and relate directly to the work they would be doing if hired. It
would have been nice if M$ would have CLEARLY distinguished the difference
in MCSE certs so that our HR folks would quit sending poor candidates
through. It would even be better if the "MCSEs" would update their
skillsets so they are qualified for the demands of todays market. The few
W2K MCSEs that we have seen simply have no experience. They passed their
tests, but just don't have the trench time yet (they shouldn't be applying
for "Senior" level positions, if you ask me). We're willing to start this
person at 75k per year (not bad, for this area), but we just can't find good
candidates.
My conclusion is simple....There are jobs out there paying decent money for
the TRULY qualified. The days of "hey, I'm and MCSE....so back up that
money truck...." are over. You gotta earn it now. Just because you've got
a cert does NOT mean that you still don't have to do your time in the entry
level trenches. Please don't waste peoples time by applying for the Sr.
level positions unless you're really qualified to fill them. It won't work
like it did 3 years ago.
--
DenverBob
MCSE/W2K
-------------------------
You probably wouldn't worry about what people think of you if you could know
how seldom they do.
Olin Miller
| |
| Maynard 2003-06-22, 3:25 am |
|
"DenverBob" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:k3cJa.100448$YZ2.269743@rwcrnsc53...
> Certs are still very important. They just get you in the door (assuming
you
> meet other requirements as well). Companies have FINALLY awakened to the
> paper certs, and they are usually filtered out quite easily in the
interview
> process.
>
> We've been trying for a couple months now to hire a Sr. level Systems
> Administrator at my company, and have yet to find anything even close to a
> good candidate. Why? Because one of the most important requirements is
> expertise in Active Directory. Most of the candidates that HR has sent
> through to be interviewed by our technical team are NT 4.0 MCSEs who
"claim"
> expertise in AD. When our technical team (all W2K MCSEs) begin asking
them
> AD questions, they tend to fail miserably. The questions are not that
> tough, and relate directly to the work they would be doing if hired. It
> would have been nice if M$ would have CLEARLY distinguished the difference
> in MCSE certs so that our HR folks would quit sending poor candidates
> through. It would even be better if the "MCSEs" would update their
> skillsets so they are qualified for the demands of todays market. The few
> W2K MCSEs that we have seen simply have no experience. They passed their
> tests, but just don't have the trench time yet (they shouldn't be applying
> for "Senior" level positions, if you ask me). We're willing to start this
> person at 75k per year (not bad, for this area), but we just can't find
good
> candidates.
>
> My conclusion is simple....There are jobs out there paying decent money
for
> the TRULY qualified. The days of "hey, I'm and MCSE....so back up that
> money truck...." are over. You gotta earn it now. Just because you've
got
> a cert does NOT mean that you still don't have to do your time in the
entry
> level trenches. Please don't waste peoples time by applying for the Sr.
> level positions unless you're really qualified to fill them. It won't
work
> like it did 3 years ago.
Your post seems to reply that a cert with experiance to back it up is
enough. Well, not really in today's overall job market. Companies don't want
MCSEs or MCSEs with experiance; at this time they are looking for SuperTech
who has a degree, experiance, and certs in multiple areas. Some of the job
ads are unreal with the kind of a skill set they want. It is like two to
three people rolled into one. You are harping on Active Directory. OK, I am
seeing ads where they want AD and DBA experiance in one. Or you need to be
an MCSE with Linex expertise that can do web design. The reason is they are
scaling back postions are need people who can do the job of two to three.
If you XXXXX then there is someone else who would be delighted to have your
job. Salaries have gone down quite a bit in some markets as well while the
work load has climbed.
And there are many SuperTechs out there who are getting hired and stuck with
being responsible for everything. I have some SuperTechs for freinds and
quite honestly I would not want the postions they have considering all they
have to do and the hours they endure. And while SuperTech has a position,
someone is trying to make more cuts to save a little more money.
IT sucks as it is turning into an electronic sweatshop. True, all this
change and downturn has not affected all companies but most at this point.
If you want to have the social life of ComicBookStoreGuy then go ahead an be
a SuperTech. For me and others, it is time to leave. Yeah, we had a lot of
good years but they came to a sudden end.
| |
| DenverBob 2003-06-22, 11:24 pm |
| I suppose that in some areas, there was the recent luxury of having
departmentalized IT support. In my 20+ years, I've never had that luxury.
I've always had to adapt to the technological demands of the
company...Whether it was mainframes, UNIX, Netrworking, SAN, NT/2000, or
whatever. I learned what I needed to do my job.
This isn't some "new" concept in IT. It's always neen this way. Only
during the "dot com" insanity did people start to think that they could just
learn some nuance of our industry...and demand top dollar for it.
Personally, I'm glad to see reality slapping all the bandwagon jumpers of
the late '90s right in the face. IT has never been the "easy ride" that so
many thought it was. Now that their moment of useful knowledge has run it's
course, all I hear is whining from the IT masses who suddenly have to start
REALLY carrying their water. They have to re-learn all the knowledge they
thought was their "golden ticket". They have to diversify their skillsets
with DBA skills, developer skills, UNIX skills, Networking skills, etc..
Personally, I'm laughing...and I can't wait until most of them crawl back to
their previous careers....because they suddenly found that the grass wasn't
so green over here. But for those who are willing to stick it out, and
learn their necessary skills...The money will return. It always does. This
is the third cycle like this I've seen in my career.
I'm not trying to rain on anyones parade here, because there's still good
money for those willing to earn it.
--
DenverBob
MCSE/W2K
-------------------------
You probably wouldn't worry about what people think of you if you could know
how seldom they do.
Olin Miller
| |
| Ida Wanna 2003-06-23, 1:25 pm |
| I've only been in IT for 4-5 years. When were the previous 2 downslides and
what were they like for you?
"DenverBob" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%cvJa.63955$vq.14395@sccrnsc04...
> I suppose that in some areas, there was the recent luxury of having
> departmentalized IT support. In my 20+ years, I've never had that luxury.
>
> I've always had to adapt to the technological demands of the
> company...Whether it was mainframes, UNIX, Netrworking, SAN, NT/2000, or
> whatever. I learned what I needed to do my job.
>
> This isn't some "new" concept in IT. It's always neen this way. Only
> during the "dot com" insanity did people start to think that they could
just
> learn some nuance of our industry...and demand top dollar for it.
>
> Personally, I'm glad to see reality slapping all the bandwagon jumpers of
> the late '90s right in the face. IT has never been the "easy ride" that
so
> many thought it was. Now that their moment of useful knowledge has run
it's
> course, all I hear is whining from the IT masses who suddenly have to
start
> REALLY carrying their water. They have to re-learn all the knowledge they
> thought was their "golden ticket". They have to diversify their skillsets
> with DBA skills, developer skills, UNIX skills, Networking skills, etc..
> Personally, I'm laughing...and I can't wait until most of them crawl back
to
> their previous careers....because they suddenly found that the grass
wasn't
> so green over here. But for those who are willing to stick it out, and
> learn their necessary skills...The money will return. It always does.
This
> is the third cycle like this I've seen in my career.
>
> I'm not trying to rain on anyones parade here, because there's still good
> money for those willing to earn it.
> --
> DenverBob
> MCSE/W2K
> -------------------------
> You probably wouldn't worry about what people think of you if you could
know
> how seldom they do.
>
> Olin Miller
>
>
| |
| DenverBob 2003-06-24, 2:24 am |
| "Ida Wanna" <tim_mclean_jm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ef742f0$0$3912$a0465688@
nnrp.fuse.net...
> I've only been in IT for 4-5 years. When were the previous 2 downslides
and
> what were they like for you?
Mostly the same. The first one I went through was in the mid-80's...When
everything was beginning to transition from mainframes to PC based systems
and mid-frames. Mainframe SysAdmins used to be the top-dogs...but many
weren't willing to shift with the technological paradigm. Also at that
time...there were many colleges and technical institutions training for the
coveted "SysAdmin" carreer path. The result was a market saturated with
inexperienced mainframe people....and it drove the salaries down. At that
time, a typical Mainframe Sr. Admin made about 80k/yr.. Within a couple of
years, it was cut in half. After the majority of them washed out of the
career field, the salaries went back up...especially for those of us who
diversified our knowledgebase with new technologies. The second was in the
mid-90's. This one was mostly economy driven. It was the pre-Internet era,
when LANs were just beginning to become the thing to have (Banyan Vines,
UNIX, and WFW 3.11 days). There was about a two year slowdown from about
1992 to 1994.
Then all hell broke loose in the late 90's with the Internet boon. Most of
us with a history in the field just watched in amazement as salaries took
off like a rocket. Most of us took advantage of the higher salaries, but we
knew they wouldn't last (there was no way they could), so we kept our
lifestyles in check. We also avoided the "vapor" .com companies like the
plague.
When the .com implosion occurred, it even caught me by surprise just how
hard and fast it fell. The good news is, I see the signs of recovery now.
For those in IT who understand the game, we're probably looking at a nice
run of increasing salaries for the next 4-5 years (not the insanity of the
Internet fiasco, though). Most of the .com casualties are nearly out of
unemployment insurance now, and are finally facing the reality of having to
change careers in order to survive. Demand for experienced IT people is
already on the rise. Demand for IT people with low to mid range experience
levels is also good, but not for much money. One trick that has always
served me well is to be willing to change companies once your experience
level warrants a significant increase.
Another bit of advice that I would offer is to choose to be in the IT
business....NOT the Microsoft business. Keep your eyes open to the
technological shifts, and be prepared to move with them. I know all
versions of NT/2000 very well. I also know Cisco, Enterasys, several
flavors of UNIX, 2 or 3 mainframe OSs, SQL, Oracle, etc. quite well. No one
is an expert in everything. You will, however, have to be willing/able to
adapt your skillset to the job/company you are currently with. That is the
best way to get ahead in this business.
--
DenverBob
MCSE/W2K
-------------------------
You probably wouldn't worry about what people think of you if you could know
how seldom they do.
Olin Miller
| |
| Ida Wanna 2003-06-24, 9:25 am |
| Thank you very much.
"DenverBob" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4fSJa.5639$Ab2.18409@sccrnsc01...
> "Ida Wanna" <tim_mclean_jm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3ef742f0$0$3912$a0465688@
nnrp.fuse.net...
> > I've only been in IT for 4-5 years. When were the previous 2 downslides
> and
> > what were they like for you?
>
> Mostly the same. The first one I went through was in the mid-80's...When
> everything was beginning to transition from mainframes to PC based systems
> and mid-frames. Mainframe SysAdmins used to be the top-dogs...but many
> weren't willing to shift with the technological paradigm. Also at that
> time...there were many colleges and technical institutions training for
the
> coveted "SysAdmin" carreer path. The result was a market saturated with
> inexperienced mainframe people....and it drove the salaries down. At that
> time, a typical Mainframe Sr. Admin made about 80k/yr.. Within a couple
of
> years, it was cut in half. After the majority of them washed out of the
> career field, the salaries went back up...especially for those of us who
> diversified our knowledgebase with new technologies. The second was in
the
> mid-90's. This one was mostly economy driven. It was the pre-Internet
era,
> when LANs were just beginning to become the thing to have (Banyan Vines,
> UNIX, and WFW 3.11 days). There was about a two year slowdown from about
> 1992 to 1994.
>
> Then all hell broke loose in the late 90's with the Internet boon. Most
of
> us with a history in the field just watched in amazement as salaries took
> off like a rocket. Most of us took advantage of the higher salaries, but
we
> knew they wouldn't last (there was no way they could), so we kept our
> lifestyles in check. We also avoided the "vapor" .com companies like the
> plague.
>
> When the .com implosion occurred, it even caught me by surprise just how
> hard and fast it fell. The good news is, I see the signs of recovery now.
> For those in IT who understand the game, we're probably looking at a nice
> run of increasing salaries for the next 4-5 years (not the insanity of the
> Internet fiasco, though). Most of the .com casualties are nearly out of
> unemployment insurance now, and are finally facing the reality of having
to
> change careers in order to survive. Demand for experienced IT people is
> already on the rise. Demand for IT people with low to mid range
experience
> levels is also good, but not for much money. One trick that has always
> served me well is to be willing to change companies once your experience
> level warrants a significant increase.
>
> Another bit of advice that I would offer is to choose to be in the IT
> business....NOT the Microsoft business. Keep your eyes open to the
> technological shifts, and be prepared to move with them. I know all
> versions of NT/2000 very well. I also know Cisco, Enterasys, several
> flavors of UNIX, 2 or 3 mainframe OSs, SQL, Oracle, etc. quite well. No
one
> is an expert in everything. You will, however, have to be willing/able to
> adapt your skillset to the job/company you are currently with. That is
the
> best way to get ahead in this business.
>
> --
> DenverBob
> MCSE/W2K
> -------------------------
> You probably wouldn't worry about what people think of you if you could
know
> how seldom they do.
>
> Olin Miller
>
>
>
| |
| The Oracle 2003-06-28, 7:24 am |
| Very well said Denverbob. You have articulated what I have been trying to
say.
"DenverBob" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4fSJa.5639$Ab2.18409@sccrnsc01...
> "Ida Wanna" <tim_mclean_jm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3ef742f0$0$3912$a0465688@
nnrp.fuse.net...
> > I've only been in IT for 4-5 years. When were the previous 2 downslides
> and
> > what were they like for you?
>
> Mostly the same. The first one I went through was in the mid-80's...When
> everything was beginning to transition from mainframes to PC based systems
> and mid-frames. Mainframe SysAdmins used to be the top-dogs...but many
> weren't willing to shift with the technological paradigm. Also at that
> time...there were many colleges and technical institutions training for
the
> coveted "SysAdmin" carreer path. The result was a market saturated with
> inexperienced mainframe people....and it drove the salaries down. At that
> time, a typical Mainframe Sr. Admin made about 80k/yr.. Within a couple
of
> years, it was cut in half. After the majority of them washed out of the
> career field, the salaries went back up...especially for those of us who
> diversified our knowledgebase with new technologies. The second was in
the
> mid-90's. This one was mostly economy driven. It was the pre-Internet
era,
> when LANs were just beginning to become the thing to have (Banyan Vines,
> UNIX, and WFW 3.11 days). There was about a two year slowdown from about
> 1992 to 1994.
>
> Then all hell broke loose in the late 90's with the Internet boon. Most
of
> us with a history in the field just watched in amazement as salaries took
> off like a rocket. Most of us took advantage of the higher salaries, but
we
> knew they wouldn't last (there was no way they could), so we kept our
> lifestyles in check. We also avoided the "vapor" .com companies like the
> plague.
>
> When the .com implosion occurred, it even caught me by surprise just how
> hard and fast it fell. The good news is, I see the signs of recovery now.
> For those in IT who understand the game, we're probably looking at a nice
> run of increasing salaries for the next 4-5 years (not the insanity of the
> Internet fiasco, though). Most of the .com casualties are nearly out of
> unemployment insurance now, and are finally facing the reality of having
to
> change careers in order to survive. Demand for experienced IT people is
> already on the rise. Demand for IT people with low to mid range
experience
> levels is also good, but not for much money. One trick that has always
> served me well is to be willing to change companies once your experience
> level warrants a significant increase.
>
> Another bit of advice that I would offer is to choose to be in the IT
> business....NOT the Microsoft business. Keep your eyes open to the
> technological shifts, and be prepared to move with them. I know all
> versions of NT/2000 very well. I also know Cisco, Enterasys, several
> flavors of UNIX, 2 or 3 mainframe OSs, SQL, Oracle, etc. quite well. No
one
> is an expert in everything. You will, however, have to be willing/able to
> adapt your skillset to the job/company you are currently with. That is
the
> best way to get ahead in this business.
>
> --
> DenverBob
> MCSE/W2K
> -------------------------
> You probably wouldn't worry about what people think of you if you could
know
> how seldom they do.
>
> Olin Miller
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
|