Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree A+ is useless. I use to teach A+ at new Horizons computer learning center. The crap we taught them was useless. Im not saying computer repair is uselss but who the heck needs to know DOS now a days and binary? Usually when someone was getting A+ certified, they were really just trying to move up the chain to networking or something actually useful. You can go to any company hiring and tell them you are A+ certified and they will either say what is that, or so what.
I agree A+ is useless. I use to teach A+ at new Horizons computer learning center. The crap we taught them was useless. Im not saying computer repair is uselss but who the heck needs to know DOS now a days and binary? Usually when someone was getting A+ certified, they were really just trying to move up the chain to networking or something actually useful. You can go to any company hiring and tell them you are A+ certified and they will either say what is that, or so what.
I'm not disagreeing about the REAL value of A+, but it is considered a basic requirement in a lot of circumstances. I think some employers consider it a given that you will have A+ (not that it means you know anything).
One guy I know got his A+ certification in 1993. It is still valid. That make it pretty suspect.
When you verify a cert as an employer, you can check the date and test number, as well as the blue print of the test content itself. The 1993 A+ was far more technical than the newer certs as it contained all of the DOS and low level hardware configuration aspects. The technology is out of date sure, but the knowledge is still useful. Back then, you had to understand in detail how interrupts worked, these days, people don't even have to know much about that, just basic file system, plug and play, USB facts, etc...
I agree A+ is useless. I use to teach A+ at new Horizons computer learning center. The crap we taught them was useless. Im not saying computer repair is uselss but who the heck needs to know DOS now a days and binary? Usually when someone was getting A+ certified, they were really just trying to move up the chain to networking or something actually useful. You can go to any company hiring and tell them you are A+ certified and they will either say what is that, or so what.
Binary is extremely important. Network engineers deal with binary or concepts of binary all the time. If you deal with ACL's, VLSM's, etc... then you should know binary. If you have ANY dealing with IPV4, you should understand binary like the back of your hand and not only that, but you should have a firm grasp of hexadecimal as well so you can deal with IPV6 as it becomes prevalent. There is a reason many engineering jobs list computer science BS as a requirement and it is because all of those core aspects are required in order to truly be an "engineer" and not simply a IT Jockey.
There are many sides to the issue, but I find they are mostly fueled by the same bravado as the Mac vs PC arguments.
Those of the "school of hard knocks" have a tendency to snub certs claiming they provide nothing, are just garbage. They are right to an extent, for a while (and to this day to an extent) there are tons of cheaters getting certs. In many ways, these brain dump chumps have lowered the trust value of certifications because of the influx of essentially clueless people walking in with pieces of paper claiming they knew something. Those as I said, who honestly studied the material, put an effort into understanding it, they actually gained something from it that is useful. As for the A+, it is simply an entry cert, a declaration to the employer that you have basic understanding of many of the low level concepts dealing with computers in general. It doesn't provide skills, it simply provides a small knowledge base. What people do with that knowledge is another thing.
Some people are extremely snobbish to those with experience if they do not have a degree and those with experience are snobs back to them. In the end, they are all idiots suffering from lack of self esteem in my opinion. All areas have benefits and bring something to the job. In the end though, it is the interview that really shows what that might be. I have seen people with master degrees walk in who couldn't plug in a NIC card if their life depended on it. I have seen people with "years of experience" walk in who did things so backwards that their work was nothing more than revolving maintenance nightmare. I have seen people with tons of certs who could barely remember the acronyms of the certs they had.
There are bad on all sides, and good on all sides. What each person brings from that experience or education is dependent on the individual.
Each cert serves a purpose.
A+ = Basic general computing knowledge
Network+/CCENT = Basic networking knowledge
Security+ = Basic security practice knowledge
Server+ = Basic sever knowledge
Linux+ = Basic Linux OS/PC knowledge
CCNA = Basic Cisco router/Switch/Networking knowledge
MCSA/MCP/MCTS = Basic windows networking/server/OS knowledge
None of them are certs that make you an expert, make you able to jump in without experience and take over operations. They will however teach someone the basics of the concepts and allow them to transition into a self sufficient role much more quickly than someone without any knowledge or only experienced in a specific area.
All are useful when you look at what they really exist to provide.
Edit:
In one place I worked we had a Network Administrator who was a complete snob when people brought up certs. He hated them, constantly talked them down and talked about how experience was far more important, etc... I later found out the reason this was is because the dumb arse couldn't pass the certs. He failed the MCSE tests so many times that work would no longer pay for them. The tests can be a bit difficult, but seriously, they are a 70% passing score and it isn't rocket science. He never did anything using anything standardized or structured. Every time he setup something, it was hours of banging his head into the wall until he finally got it to work. The network was poorly designed, managed and maintained. He horded over everything trying to keep secret everything he did so everyone would have to come to him to figure something out. If I had a nickle for the number of fools like this I have seen, I would make Bill Gates look poor.
In one place I worked we had a Network Administrator who was a complete snob when people brought up certs. He hated them, constantly talked them down and talked about how experience was far more important, etc... I later found out the reason this was is because the dumb arse couldn't pass the certs. He failed the MCSE tests so many times that work would no longer pay for them. The tests can be a bit difficult, but seriously, they are a 70% passing score and it isn't rocket science. He never did anything using anything standardized or structured. Every time he setup something, it was hours of banging his head into the wall until he finally got it to work. The network was poorly designed, managed and maintained. He horded over everything trying to keep secret everything he did so everyone would have to come to him to figure something out. If I had a nickle for the number of fools like this I have seen, I would make Bill Gates look poor.
I've been stuck with a few of these over the years. What really ticked me off was you couldn't get rid of them! Management just didn't understand the problems they created because the system worked. It didn't work well, but it did, and that's all they wanted to know.
I've also worked with cert jerks. Some of them had every cert they could pass a test for. Some knew their stuff and some knew how to cheat through the tests. Both types could be dangerous.
Maybe A+ certs have gotten better over the past 20ish years. But back to the OPs question. When I interview people, I tend to look for the hobbyists. The ones who built a computer from scratch and how they resolved problems as they arose. I've looked more for the trial and error approaches than the stock answers. I look for people who can program a web page rather than the ones who tell me how great the out of box version is. Many large companies are using equipment from 20 years ago. And they have the mindset of if it works why spend the money to upgrade. Look at MVS its still in use for about 30 years now. I went to one place where most of their computers were Win95 and two of them were Win3.1. The old networks are still out there. The main problem is that some the hardware to too well made that the mnf never created new drivers for the older stuff. They just came out with newer machines. Like many mnf's they expect people to just throw out the older stuff. My expectations are for my people to work with what they have. We are there to service the customer. If their request is out of the scope of their equipment, then they will suggest what will be needed. We are not a sales service.
Back to the OP. If you are going for the certs, at least go in a direction where they are actually used.
Maybe A+ certs have gotten better over the past 20ish years. But back to the OPs question. When I interview people, I tend to look for the hobbyists. The ones who built a computer from scratch and how they resolved problems as they arose. I've looked more for the trial and error approaches than the stock answers. I look for people who can program a web page rather than the ones who tell me how great the out of box version is. Many large companies are using equipment from 20 years ago. And they have the mindset of if it works why spend the money to upgrade. Look at MVS its still in use for about 30 years now. I went to one place where most of their computers were Win95 and two of them were Win3.1. The old networks are still out there. The main problem is that some the hardware to too well made that the mnf never created new drivers for the older stuff. They just came out with newer machines. Like many mnf's they expect people to just throw out the older stuff. My expectations are for my people to work with what they have. We are there to service the customer. If their request is out of the scope of their equipment, then they will suggest what will be needed. We are not a sales service.
Back to the OP. If you are going for the certs, at least go in a direction where they are actually used.
The bold is very important, academic knowledge is meaningless if one can not apply the proper skills of resolving the issue. That said, academic knowledge (Certs, schools, etc...) is very important as well. Reason I say is I have seen a lot of troubleshooting issues avoided by simply having a firm understanding of the core foundations and practice of a topic. A lot of the trial and error I have seen in the past is due to the fact that the tech/administrator/engineer didn't have a firm grasp of the core aspects of the technology.
While this is more prevalent when dealing with higher concepts that deal with the relation of layer models, that foundation can make troubleshooting issues at lower levels easier to resolve as well. I have seen techs who did not understand the OSI model well or at all spend hours troubleshooting connection issues which could have been resolved in a matter of minutes or seconds by simply understanding how those layers relate and interact with each other. Yes, a concept likely above most tech level jobs, but it is covered in the A+ and an enthusiast can make good use of that knowledge.
I find that the knowledge is simply a tool belt and experience is knowing how to use the tools to their best advantage. A person with simply knowledge may understand the tools, but not quite relate them to the environment. The person with experience understands the environment, but may lack in a selection of tools to work with (hence trial and error). Add them both and you have the perfect solution to any situation.
A lot of the trial and error I have seen in the past is due to the fact that the tech/administrator/engineer didn't have a firm grasp of the core aspects of the technology.
You must work in a perfect world where nothing goes wrong. No technology has ever grown without failures (bugs). What do you think R&D is? True experience comes from dealing with failures and resolving them as quick as possible. The problem with core/foundation skills currently is that they keep on removing the true basics of a platform. The things that are still in the base code. I rarely see anyone who can read a hex dump anymore. That comes from years of dealing with situations that get into manuals because of us. We are Tier X.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
