Red Hat Takes Heat Over Certification 243
EdA wrote in to tell us about this piece, where Red Hat takes heat for its certification process. From the article - "I'm no more of a fan of Microsoft than the next person, but I can say that the support we get from Microsoft is superior, and less expensive," Daher said. "Microsoft always comes to our door, they bring demo units, keep us in touch with their engineers, and certification for our people costs only $2000 each, on-site. Red Hat wants $5,000 a person and we have to fly our people to Durham, [N.C.]."
It's best to keep them barefoot and pregnant (Score:1)
The problem with Microsoft certifications... (Score:1)
The Sad Thing Is (Score:1)
small to mid size consulting firm who has just been charged with setting up a mid size web site. He has secured the hardware, obtained a shrink wrapped Redhat 6.1 CD, and using the new "user friendly" install -- he is now looking at a full blown X desktop....
6 hours later I get a phone call with "belly laughs" on the other end, when one of my contractors, upon stumbling over this poor guy trying to use GMC to set file permissions (of which he cannot grasp the concept of), and some graphical front end to Apache....
This is the *nix admin of tommorow...These are Microsoft Kids who have been "schooled" in the art of BILL....Where many "unqualified" individuals have been making a living with VB and FrontPage for the 6 years...and surprise now the customers want them to use this new Linux thing...
I love it....Bottom line -- some sort of certification is needed, and RedHat must do it Better, Cheaper, and More Efficient than the "other guy"...
Re:Now there's a business plan... (Score:1)
But wait, there's more. Doing it "the Linux way"(tm) is, what the guys over at LPI [lpi.org] (Linux Professional Institute) are doing: an open process to create and review certification questions based on a community process in identifying objects and areas of interest. They are also the ones who are backed by the big boys (SuSE, IBM, Caldera)
But... the market is still young. If you can throw $2-5M at developing and marketing (that's most important, imho) a certification, you have a great chance for your upcoming IPO.
go figure.
Hmmm... (Score:1)
Assume they require the same kind of hardware.
Should I go either:
1) Install them individually with Microsoft (conservative estimates, I'm putting those as low as possible...):
+ 20 servers * 1000$ worth of software (NT Server)
+ 80 workstations * 1000$ worth of software (NT Workstation + Office)
+ 2000$*2(cert cost)
= 104000$
2) Kickstart them using RedHat Linux:
+ 150$ RedHat Linux Professionnal (this could also be 0$)
+ 80$ RedHat Deluxe (for workstations)
+ 55000$ RH platinum support for the first year (unlimited incidents for the servers plus training for 2, check it out!)
+ 40000$ an extra (on a baseline salary of x) of 40000$ to the top gun Unix IT guy I'll hire and keep
= 95230$
Hmm. Let me think... Seems to me that the Linux solutions gives me more room to buy proprietary software, more hardware, more support, more books... AND I'd have a better, more intelligent architecture that is automated.
Tough choice!
Re:Now there's a business plan... (Score:1)
Re:My name is Mark, and I'm a RHCE (Score:1)
--
Michael Hasenstein
http://www.suse.de/~mha/ [www.suse.de]
Re:Give Red Hat a break. (Score:1)
--
Michael Hasenstein
http://www.suse.de/~mha/ [www.suse.de]
Re:Microsoft is superior, and less expensive (Score:1)
We will get there... but one has to acknowledge that 3xx people companies like us (SuSE) or RH can't have everything 4x.xxx people companies like Oracle have.
--
Michael Hasenstein
http://www.suse.de/~mha/ [www.suse.de]
Re:troll bait - Re:My name is Mark, and I'm a RHCE (Score:1)
--
Michael Hasenstein
http://www.suse.de/~mha/ [www.suse.de]
Re:Excellent points (Score:1)
Let the tech folks do their jobs... PLEEZ!
They do indeed hold the keys to the tank. Let them wield them! You'll Save Money!
Geeezz...
But how meaningful are the Certifications? (Score:1)
Back in the 80's, a CNE (Certified Network Engineer) meant something. You knew a CNE knew the signals travelling through your wiring, could compute the length you could traverse with a particular type of wiring, and could diagnose any problem you might happen to have. This has been diluted somewhat over the years (I don't think you actually end up needing to learn the math these days), but a CNE still means something.
A Cisco certification still means something. There is rigorous testing to make sure you know what the heck you are doing.
MCSE means diddley. Several of the sessions offered by MS, if you pay the entrance fee and attend you receive the certification, no exam required. Others require an exam in order to receive the certification (these don't cost as much).
Which basically means, you can buy a MCSE certificate to hang on your wall and your business card, but it is meaningless.
How meaningful is Red Hat's certification process? If it is more in line with Novell's or Cisco's, compare prices with their programs, not Microsoft's silly buy $2000 piece of paper.
LPI Costs: $100 per exam, 2 exams per lvl, 3 lvls (Score:1)
They work with Virtual University Enterprises [vue.com] to deliver their exams, so you can take them at over a thousand places worldwide.
Zipwow
(Disclaimer: I work for VUE)
Doh! (Score:1)
Re:Now there's a business plan... (Score:1)
This way redhat, caldera, sgi, corel, etc. could certify people as LCE's but they would all mean the same thing.
You would get an LCE from corel for example.
Binder
Re:My name is Mark, and I'm a RHCE (Score:1)
RH does not require you to fly to N.C. (Score:1)
First of all, I am disgusted with the number of idiots who have this notion that Linux can do no wrong who respond to ligitimate criticism of the certification process by getting all emotional.
That said, if you are in the Silicon Valley area, you do not need to fly to N.C. to get certified. You do need to take the one week coursework before taking the test, yes, where you can get away with just taking the test if you go to N.C., but besides that the prices are comparable.
As for the other points, we are looking at economies of scale here. As more and more people get certified, the certification process will cost less and less. Give it time. Until then, consultants have an edge because, as other posters have correctly pointed out, a RedHat certificate is more valuable than a MCSE. This edge is easily worth the time and expense of getting the certificate.
- Sam
Re:But how meaningful are the Certifications? (Score:1)
Doesn't commenting on it undo the moderation you just did, or are you bragging about having found a way to cheat on the moderation system?
As long as you're going to Durham... (Score:1)
Look on the bright side, Chapel Hill/Carrboro are practically right next door so you can hit Cat's Cradle before going home.
Going to Durham, part 2 (Score:1)
I wish RedHat (Score:1)
So what? (Score:1)
Well, at least the OS costs little or nothing.
Re:MS vs. RH (Score:1)
Re:SCO Certification (Score:1)
Can you post it?
RTFM is a very true level (Score:1)
You wouldn't be that badly off with that, I guess - you'd end up with an employer with a wider view.
Even seriously, I'd hire an RTFM person over any MSCE or RHSE. It's a different level of capability to be able to say "I'll read the man page and do it" than "sorry, I can't do it because I haven't done it before".
I myself can't even claim having any official degree, yet people keep asking me over. But that's just the current market.
A Peculiar Argument (Score:1)
While this argument is valid for someone from, say, Chicago, Illinois, doesn't it seem a bit odd that these guys instigated the whole thing? Surely, they must realize that as Linux grows in popularity, there will be certification programs all over the place for Linux. Why pick on Red Hat, and why now, and why from Redmond, Washington?
I'm going to learn more about MicroStandards Distributors. Lots more. In the beginning of the article, I was actually impressed with their point of view, until I realized that they were pitting Microsoft certification against Red Hat certification; when I read the location information at the end, I suddenly regarded the article as a wash.
That's the support model for ya (Score:1)
As for certified folks wandering off to greener pastures, deal with it. This happens to every new hot certification. I wonder how many early MCSEs or CCIEs had the same desire to go to where the money or work environment was better with the same effect on their employer. When the market hits some kind of parity, the problem will evaporate. That's just the way it is.
Re:SCO Certification (Score:1)
Free? I dont think so. SCO has never given anything to anyone. This is the biggest lie I have ever seen posted on slashdot.
The big "well, duh!" (Score:1)
Of course, as many hiring managers would tell you, if warm bodies weren't worth what they are in this labor market, M$ certification guarantees nothing.
Red Hat is trying the same thing, but is making the mistake of trying to imbue legitimacy into an otherwise technologically worthless process.
It's high school all over again - cram for the tests, learn nothing, get yer paper, etc, ad nauseum - only the cost is more than just your post-pubescent sanity.
Pretty much any cert that you can get by a little study and a few tests is not worth getting, at least in the competitive job markets. Compare the Sun JAVA certification - it's hard as hell, and people who have it usually _know_ java.
These guys (the complaintants in the article) sound like the 'grab a book and get your paper' cert is exactly what they're looking for.
--
blue, who, in spite of all of this, is going to get his DYNIX/ptx certification.
Where do you live? (Score:1)
That being the case I've witnessed, I can't possibly imagine a region where there's more actual demand for Red Hat certified engineers in comparisson to Microsoft certified ones. It's not like this is a single agency phenomenon. It's ALL of them, here.
If you look at what this firm is complaining about (Score:1)
Linux is NOT the problem. Specifically, he is complaining that since Linux certified people are so few and far between, they are hard to hold on to. Well, I didn't know Linux professionals were so valuable! ;->
Well I'm sorry! Just because the Linux market isn't saturated with such "professionals" like Microsoft/Novell, you think that is the fault of Linux or RedHat?!?!?! Geez!
And thank the media and bigots because the all backlash that has been building up for all the unwanted hype is about to be unleashed on Linux. People are looking for people to blame, whether that is Microsoft, Novell or, now, RedHat. Quit finger pointing and get working!
Revolution doesn't come easy people! Look at the long term, not the short. So many narrow minded people. Sure enough, consulting firms who worry about certifications are the ones bitching the loudest.
Me? No certification. No fancy titles. Just years of NT, Novell and Linux experience and software development and some publications.
-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith
Command Line GUIS (Score:1)
The real problem with GUIs that I have been able to find is that in order to simplify GUIs need to make assumptions. Now good GUIs will have an "options" or "advanced" or "experts" page that will let you change those assumptions.
One system that I am liking the more that I use it the HP/UX SAM (System administration Tool). SAM is an ungrateful pain in the ass. SAM is much easier to use than the command line (HP/UX is the leading cause of skull fractures and dented walls around here). You would not let a complete beginner loose on SAM, but somebody who is coming up to speed or coming from Linux can do great on it. where am I really going?
SAM is a GUI that will tell you all of the command line functions that it ran. If I need to script something that I do not know how to do yet, I run it once in SAM, pick out the right commands to use, test, and away I go.
The hardest part about CLI is knowing which commands to use.
chris
Why certify? (Score:1)
I'm also an MCSE and I have taught classes on UNIX, TCP/IP, and network design (I'm also a CCDA).
The more I think about the differences between the platforms (after a nasty fight/discussion with my SO this weekend) I agree that the differences in the platforms and the learning curve is understanding.
An NT admin can be reasonably functional not knowing how anything actually works, just how to make it work, until it breaks.
A UNIX Admin cannot be reasonably functional without at least a basic understanding of how the pieces of the puzzle fit together. Or are we just fooling ourselves?
Maybe the GUI really is the difference. In NT I go start>programs>administrative tools>user manager. In Linux I find a command prompt and type useradd. Or I can hunt through the new Gnome based tools...
maybe the GUI makes it easier, maybe the GUI hides complexity so people don't need to understand how things really work just to do simple tasks.
If the GUI takes control and brings in hordes of junior sysadmins, this may be a good thing for knowledgable tech workers overall. It will allow us to spend less time on mundane tasks and give a much greater understanding and respect for our abilities when things do really go wrong...
chris
The value of certification in business to business (Score:1)
One of the problems with certification is that employers tend to NOT want to pay you any (or much) more once you do get certified (assuming they hired you before being certified, and wanted you to get certified afterwards). Perhaps this is because employers (managers) themselves don't really see any value to the certification in the sense of valuing you as an employee, though they often do see the value in terms of customer relations. What this means is that to am employer, certification of an employee is something to tally up and brag about to a client or potential client, and is quickly forgotten about when your next salary review comes up. I see more demand for certification in body shops (e.g. consulting firms), whether that be Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, Baan, PeopleSoft, Lotus, Cisco or Redhat. I see less of that demand when the employer is not in the business of peddling warm bodies to other businesses.
Consider this. If the consulting firm is presenting themselves to a client, who's reputation are they trying to present and bolster when they do this? Certainly not the reputation of the individual who will end up coming out there for are short time to work. There are some exceptions, but that's generally when the person being presented has something even better than a certification, such as a Ph.D., or they were on the development team of the product they are consulting for.
Pick one of the better known Linux developers whose name you know. Now imagine some Linux consulting business manages to get them on staff or as a partner. Of course when they present to a potential client that needs such a person, they will point the praises directly to them. The certification, if they even have one, probably won't even be mentioned (although they surely won't forget to add it to the tally sheet for other clients). For the rest of us in other situations, we're just numbers on a tally sheet that gets presented to the clients as part of the reputation building of the company itself.
This is the unfortunate of how business does work. There isn't much else that can be done when company A wants to build its reputation to company B in order to get company B's business. As evil as many of us want to think of certification (and it probably got that reputation from the way a couple of other companies were handing them out) it is about the only thing business has to go on when you're looking at the third party consulting market.
What Redhat is doing, by charging much higher fees, and making the test much tougher, is probably an effort to avoid dilution of the certification value. I can tell you this. If I was hiring an NT administrator, and two candidates both had one year experience working with NT in an administrative capacity, and one had an MCSE while the other had a CCIE, I'd hire the CCIE in a heartbeat and sleep well that night. Cisco has done well to make sure their certification program represents the value of the people that earn it. Maybe Redhat is actually trying to do just that, too.
Re:So I'll tell you. (Score:1)
Finnaly, someone knows what BSOD really stands for. (backwards) Denial-Of-Service rev B
--
Re:Not Fair (Score:1)
Actually, M$ products have a very low (0) cost of ownership. M$ owns it, you just licence it. Big difference!
--
Re:what costs what (Score:1)
*yawn* I can't speak for gateway, but the last three servers I ordered from Dell came without an OS. It helps if you actually talk to a person.
Oh, also take a look at this. [dell.com] I can get Novell and Red Hat too! (check the OS section.)
Try checking some facts next time.
MS vs. RH (Score:1)
Point 1: RH training was at that time far from perfect. I wrote a them a rather lengthy letter regarding the state of their training. After I completed the examination, I spend about an hour talking with one of the instructor's regarding the training format and material.
I have not attended a MS type bootcamp to date. Rather I have purchase about $600 worth of texts and $2000 in CBT. I have yet to get a consistant answer from either regarding many issues of the Win architecture. All of the books mildly flame MS's testing structure. Even the bootcamps I have evaluated for attending this summer all mildly flame the MS concept of certification.
Point 2: As products go, this is a comparison between apples and a dung heap. RH just like the other major Linux distro's produces relatively prompt patches (yes, there are some biggies which are still hanging around). MS on the otherhand has lead the life of denial. Keeping some patches secret (meaning unless you contact the magic people and tell them the correct definition of the problem, they will not give you the patch even though they know the product is broken).
Point 3: RH is not the end-all of end-alls in Linux. They are one of many resources available. If you are dissatisfied with them, there are other distro's and their support staff. However, MS is the final word on MS.
IF A CAR WORKED AS POORLY AS MS PRODUCTS, WE WOULD SEE A TON MORE BIKES!!
Other alternatives to RedHat Certification (Score:1)
This does bring up an important point though: If RedHat can't clean up their act they can lose their grip on the certification "racket" which will in turn hurt them in corporate area when corporations start turning to other Distros with better certification programs.
-Lee
troll bait - Re:My name is Mark, and I'm a RHCE (Score:1)
Consider the possibilities of someone posting just the questions?
Re:Is Linux Certification Relevant (Score:1)
I'd be more comfortable with the corner guy. The only way an unaffiliated garage can stay in business for long is by offering good service - they can't rely on customers like you, who figure that the only mechanics who could possibly understand Ford brakes are Ford-trained. And I'd extend the argument back to certification, too. None of the people I'm familiar with who really know their stuff have bothered to get a certificate "proving" their expertise. Their track record (successful projects & happy customers) speaks for itself.
You get what you pay for. (Score:1)
M$ certification produces over-confident trained monkeys whose only skill is to anticipate the contents of a window before it comes up. Ask them to tell you just what it is that all those points and clicks do and you'll get a "deer in headlights" response.
RedHat is training people to use a true and powerful multi-user system that operates more or less like every flavour of UNIX out there. They gain a thorough understanding of the system AND the technologies. You end up with a well-rounded technician who can provide insight into Linux in particular and operating systems/network applications in general. Worth the extra money to wind up with someone who's got more than a Pavlovian sense of how to run a server.
Wrong mindset (Score:1)
Microsoft has (had?) a monopoly on OS's--therefore they have a monopoly on OS certs. If you need an OS cert, then you have no choice. However, if you find it bothersome to fly to NC and spend $5000 for Linux training it doesn't matter--you don't need to. That's the difference between RedHat and Microsoft. There have always been (and always will be) alternatives to RedHat--but until recently there were no alternatives to Microsoft.
--
Re:Is Linux Certification Relevant (Score:2)
not hiring folks with certs (Score:2)
Yes, you're right, a cert doesn't show competancy in the job market, however you shouldn't declare that anybody who has one is inherently inferior. It's a flawed assumption.
----------------------------
Visa (Score:2)
$75
The cost of RHCE training for your IS employee:
$5000
The cost of being to sleep at night, knowing that your network is working:
priceless
Well, whoop-de-do (Score:2)
MicroStandard Distributors, in Redmond, Wash., is at
A little payola there maybe? Afraid any impact on Msft is going to effect the ol' local economy and the Redmond standard of living? We know boats are selling well there!
Well, Mike - unlike Msft, nobody's trying to FORCE you to utilize Linux - instead of bitching at a developers conference just install NT4 or 2K and call for all the support you want! It's really that simple.
When we went looking for NT4 cert training in 97 I was gasping at one local Institute that wanted nearly $10,000 for a complete set of instructor led courses!! And *I* had to go to THEIR classrooms! We eventually settled for a $1000 set of books/vid-tapes and lots of midnight oil, plus the $600 for the set of exams. Now that that will be obsolete in 12/2001, I get a dialy lesson out of
Self supporting, and darn good at it.
Re:Prices -Check Again $2,498 (Score:2)
I'm sure the airfare adds to the cost buy this is directly from Red Hat Training info
On top of all that, keep in mind that the company rep that said:
...happens to work for a company located in the same city as Microsoft, where it would be easy for MS to offer this type of service. I'm sure you can find someone down in NC who would be willing to give you the exact same article with a different point of view.
To be polite, I won't even rant about the idiot who thinks that the world should come to him when he wants something... oh, wait, just did. Darn.
Re:Why certify? (Score:2)
What a command line offers is more options than can be reasonably stuffed into a GUI (with out making the screen unreadable).
Of course there remains the issue of WHEN to use WHAT command. Each command having it's own unique issues a newbe won't know about but thies issues get documented on a command line document (man pages).
All and all I'd say for a newbe Linux and NT is about the same. With Linux your in deep dodo in trying to "make the network go" with NT you are given enough rope so when something goes wrong you hang yourself.
Linux dosn't let you "wing it" and in a way that is a good thing. You don't want your admin to "wing it". NT cert says "I'm not winging it" a Linux cert needs to say "Expert" sence there is no "winging it" with Linux.
On the other hand you self train on Linux. Visit
A GUI also means you will NOT be getting "up to speed" just by poking around the system. You do need to read manuals and take a class. You do need trainning.
A command line means you can not just jump in and take over the world. But given time.. poking around.. you could do just that.
But thats still not enough for an admin today. With script kiddys and expert crackers running around trying to mess with whomever they take a dislike to an admin needs to be a total systems expert. If Linux is to maintain it's "reliable" image the cert needs to be above par.
RedHats cert is shooting for the poor mans Sun cert not an expensive Microsoft cert.
MCSE thoughts, and certificate in general (Score:2)
When I put on the job description that linux experience is a plus, and the resume says the guy is an RHCE, I'm going to do a quick assessment of whether RHCE is for real, and say 'okay, I'm reasonably satisfied that if he has his RHCE, he has some linux experience'.
The same goes for MCSE. Increasingly, I've seen companies stating they want 'experience with x and x and x MS products' and not 'MCSE required'. If you have MCSE, it may indicate that you have that experience. As many employers have found out, it also may not.
See, it's not that MCSE is bad, or evil, or anything like that.. you learn quite a bit about MS and how their products are supposed to work.
The problem is that far too many people come out of the course thinking 'okay, now I'm at the top of the hill, time to go take over some company's network'.
MCSE is a good requirement for a junior/intermediate admin position, for those who want a foot in the door in the IT field. It's far from the be-all-end-all of IT education. It's barely a beginning.
Not Fair (Score:2)
Redhat doesn't have the revenue, or the staff to offer the level of service Microsoft has. However, you can still recieve a high value product and have a lower total cost of ownership. These are real concerns, but companies need to look at the differing revenue structures and remember they didn't pay anything for their operating systems. When Redhat starts charging $300 per seat and per computer that can connect. They a company can have a reason to complain. For now, I have no pitty.
Geach
Re:Give Red Hat a break: you, me and who else? (Score:2)
Personally I'd rather have a $5000 training course and free software vs. a $2000 training and $1000/seat software. Hmmm, which is the "real" deal?
--
ba-bu-ba-ba-baaa, da-da-dum. Re-boot the ser-ver.
ba-bu-ba-ba-baaa, da-da-dum. Re-boot the ser-ver.
Value of certification? (Score:2)
What is the point and what does he want? A $2000 certification which is guaranteed not to make his employees more skilled? Or a $5000 that makes them attractive? I dont quite get the logic. Or, even worse, I do get the logic.
In the Real Computers world we usually go to courses to actually learn and become more valuable to the company (and the rest of the market), rather than to get a pretty paper. I can print my own pretty papers saying Im a certified whatever if I felt the need. Im sure Redhat could sell pretty papers too, and they probably will, once they realize that customers like Mr Daher arent interested in his employees being skilled (ouch, expensive to pay), just in them being 'certified' (good selling point). It's a classical scheme, selling unskilled personell straight from a 'want fries with that' job, slapping a certification on them and pretending they are 'computer consultants'.
Congratulations. For the final question in this $2000 certification program, once you have passed this exam you will become a certified:
a) Doughnut.
b) Peanut.
c) Nutcase.
d) RebootMonkey(tm)
Re:Against the anti-cert mentality (Score:2)
But you've also expressed an unblanced view (albeit slightly less unbalanced). For example, your contention that classroom training with a good instructor is better than self-directed study is not always true. As an instructor, you must know as well as I do that different people learn differently. Some learn better by reading, some by doing. Some learn better with others in a classroom setting, and some learn better alone, at their own pace. We do best when we provide many different learning opportunities, rather than claiming that one will do it all for everyone. As businesspeople, we cut ourselves off from potentially great employees by insisting on only accepting those that are good at classroom work and passing tests.
It is also less than obvious to me that vendor-given tests are a valid way to determine whether someone has the knowledge necessary to perform a real-world job. These vendor-supplied tests only test for short-term rote memorization. It's rare that part of my job requires me to tell someone the definition of a relative distinguished name, or describe the differences between typeful and typeless naming.
As a former HR professional, I also know that, in reality, we're unlikely to see a move away from the 'alphabet soup after your name, or no work for you!' mentality. Looking for certifications is just too easy, as compared with using effective interviewing techniques to find those who will be the best persons for the job. It's a sad situation.
But I think we in the computer professions do ourselves a disservice by touting the alphabet soup mentality as the be-all and end-all when it comes to proving who is good enough. It can be a valid tool when the certification process is done properly, and when the certifications are viewed in the context of the whole person.
Let's not go off the deep end, either way.
Re:But how meaningful are the Certifications? (Score:2)
MCSE Reflexes
-------------------
Client
MCSE man
[the client reboots, 3 minutes]
Client
MCSE man
[the client reinstalls their 3com drivers 5 minutes]
[the client reboots 3 minutes]
Client
MCSE man
[CNE man enters]
CNE man
Client
CNE man
[CNE man checks to see if the user has been deleted from the NT server. 2 mintues (gotta let the monitor warm up (NO termial server HERE!))]
[CNE man adds the users rights to his folder. 3 minutes]
[CNE man curses the MCSE people who don't know how to roll over servers correctly. 100 years]
MCSE man
CME man
DISCLAIMER:: This is an acutal occurence. I went on vacation and the boss wanted to put the data from the file server into a faster machine. So MCSE men didn't give the users the correct access rights. I currently do not run Novell Netware on any of my servers. I have to deal with NT and Win98. Yes... I know 98 and NT are like oil and water, but I have a budget.
Re:Is Linux Certification Relevant (Score:2)
The purpose for having these certifications to allow for people to be "Labeled" as certified, so that companies may feel more comfortable about hiring someone. If you screw up and are certified, at least the one that employed you had an excuse to hire you, and my be able to save their @$$. Now this may not hold true if you are certified by "Joe Schmoe Linux Certification". You need to be certified by a recognizable source.
Steven Rostedt
Re:SCO Certification (Score:2)
Now there's a business plan... (Score:2)
Publish the syllabus, sample papers and the pass mark to establish some credibility. Offer telephone support, charge substantially less than Red Hat and do your marketing on the net. Hell, do your tuition over the net. Now that could be fun.
Providing you maintain the integrity of the exam, you could do very well.
If someone wants to lend we some start-up cash, they can join in the IPO in two year's time. All I need is another few geeks with good interpersonal skills - whoops - that's the fatal flaw.
my msce experiences (Score:2)
as many have pointed out, too often people see certification as a replacement for experience. without a doubt, i would hire someone with no certification and a few years experience than vice versa. certification means nothing to me, and if my employer hadn't paid for it for me, i would never in a million years be bothered with it. as it was, i didn't study for the win95 exam, and just a little for the win nt server exam, yet i still did ok (900+ out of 1000 on both).
but wait, there's more: i also have problems with the exams themselves. my main problem with them is that they do not test anything real, or even anything worth learning. the knowledge that you gain from working closely with windows boxen on a real, production network is not, for the most part, going to help you pass the certification exams. the win95 exam, for example, emphasized upgrading from dos/win3.1 to windows 95. who does that? nobody real.
i got my microso~1 certifications about two years ago (back when the win95 exam was still pretty current), after taking a few classes (not the official ms endorsed ones, but from a local university). my experience has been that the majority of the people in the classes, and therefore probably most people taking the exams, are in it for the money, not for the love of it. Ask anyone in the classes (and i did ask a bunch of them), and in the top 2 or 3 reasons for taking the class is 'more money.' wanting to make more money is not a bad thing in and of itself, of course; it's when more money is the primary motivation for taking the exams that you have to be wary.
of the people i saw week to week in my classes, there were almost none that i would have voluntarily worked with. they were all nice enough, but, almost without exception, were not really interested in what they were doing.
this is the crucial difference between microso~1 folks and the *nix folks, at least that i have found: the *nix folks tend to do it because they love it. yeah, you can make a decent (really decent in come cases) living out of it, but for many of us, that is secondary. no one that i know of administers nt networks for the love of it.
darren
Cthulhu for President! [cthulhu.org]
I'm surprised... (Score:2)
I'm surprised to find out that anyone gives a fsck about vendor "certification". I thought everyone had realized it was a meaningless scam by now. A week or two of training isn't going to get you any more knowledge than reading a good book (like an O'Reilly guide) and playing with the system a bit - and an O'Reilly guide is a hell of a lot cheaper.
From the article:
Not with knowledgable customers - or knowledgable potential employees.
In this market, skilled employees can move almost anywhere they want anytime, with or without certification. (Besides, isn't this contradictory to their complaint - Red Hat's certification sucks so bad that certified people suddenly have new opportunites arise and leave our company. Uh, yeah.)
Re:I'm surprised... (Score:2)
Same thing if they start babbling about vendor certifications: you calmly explain that these are largely marketing ploys and not necessarily marks of highly skilled professionals; that you/your staff are well-trained, and have years of experience; that you have worked with clients x, y, and z on projects foo, bar, and baz, and here's how these projects relate to what you're going to do for them.
The key difference is that electrical contractors won't hand you a piece of paper with "Certified Square-D Circuit Breaker Installer" that he earned in a few classroom days on it. Contractor licences aren't vendor certifications, they are professional standards administered by the stateRe:Why certify? (Score:2)
1) Can the person LEARN
* I had allot of students in my class that knew very little about computers. Learning everything needed to take the MCSE was a worth while accomplishment for them... and most are now bugging me asking me to teach them linux...
Allot of my students had to really study hard for the exams. I wouldn't hire them to run my network because they have a certification. However, I would give them a big chance because they can LEARN. That, of course, only applies to the students that came into the class not knowing much about the subject already.
For the students that already knew the subject already, I might have them run my network off of their abilities but I wouldn't hire them because they can LEARN (which, IMO, someone who can learn is much more important than someone that just knows something well).
It is my belief that the RHCE certification... or wait, better yet... the LPI (www.lpi.org) certification requires a student which already understands the concept of learning as the subject will be harder to grasp (because linux is harder to learn than NT).
MY POINT:
Figure out what all is entailed in the certification the person has... TRY (though not alwasy possible) to find out what that person had to do to get it. Then you can better figure out if this person has what it takes.
Never take a certification for the certification itself. For some people the certification serves as a motivation (for others its "Damit! I paid $5000 for this course and I'm going to finish it and get all that I can out of it").
For others that really like the subject they are motivated enough.
So... "why certify?"... if it motivates you to learn something you need or want to learn.
Then, you can portray to the employer what you know something (or BS your certification, as some do, and see if he/she takes it). Because you have this certification, depending on the employer's knowledge of the cert and the leap that you had to take to get it, the employer might even be able to determine more than what you know but how well you learn.
my 3c
- cyphunk
Re:Is Linux Certification Relevant (Score:2)
So I will start a rival Certification process in which I will send you the certificate if you answer the following question correctly
Q: After issuing the shutdown -h now command, what colour is the sky outside ?
and send me $50
And MY certification program includes a pointless newsletter written about gardening.
Re:Microsoft has a Vested Interest to keep Redhat (Score:2)
//rdj
Re:So what? (Score:2)
I would be more inclined to question the value of the certification. It's just another piece of paper. We make millions of pieces of paper every day. So what makes a Redhat Linux Certification any more or less valuable than a UPS waybill or say a stock certificate? (This can be said of _any_ certification.)
As for on-site training, certainly Microsoft has a broader base from which to work. They've been at this for alot longer than Redhat. Give Redhat some time to clear away the dust and put all their ducks, err penguins, in a row.
Re:As an MCSE.... (Score:2)
Written Exam: $200
Lab Exam: $1000
Cheaper than MCSE *or* RHCE!
Not exactly, MCSE requires *only* that you pass 6 exams, which at a cost of $100 each equals only a requirement of $600. The optional classes are what is going to cost the biggest chunk of money, but this is also true with Cisco training, Novell training, RedHat training, etc. MCSE classes are not necessary for an admin with half a clue.
Re:RHCE is not Industry Standard (Score:2)
Re:Come On! (Score:2)
I don't see the argument here (Score:2)
The person that wrote this article quite obviously wasn't completely aware of all the facts. True, Microsoft "Certification" only costs $2000... but that's only for a general MCP certification. Not worth much in today's market depending on what product you are certified in. This certification also isn't really a good match to Red Hat's RHCE program. It's more of an apples to oranges comparison. Microsoft's MCSE certification is a much better comparison. This, however, requires 6 classes @ $2000/each - bringing the total to $12,000. Suddenly Red Hat's meager $5000 doesn't look so bad - with or without the trip to N.C. The author does bring up some good points about having engineers on your doorstep and pushing eval software and so on. But considering pretty much everything Red Hat makes is also available for free, I don't the eval argument has much weight. Having engineers on your doorstep is a questionable comment. I work in a large, enterprise Microsoft environment (57,000 users worldwide). I have yet to actually "see" any Microsoft engineers in relation to my job. I have spoken with them on the phone for support but that's about it. If the author is referring to MCSE's (Microsoft Certified System Engineers) that's another story. There are like millions of these guys nowadays... some are quite knowledgable, some are slightly better than having a $60.00 book at your disposal (if Red Hat is smart, they will examine and learn from this situation). I think that this argument is countered by the very existance of the RHCE program. This is exactly the kind of presence (well, not exactly but you know what I mean) that I think Red Hat is targeting with their certification.
Re:RTFM is a very true level (Score:2)
Or maybe I should add RTFM to my skill set on my resume!
Re:Why certify? (Score:2)
A lot of employers are interested in what experience I have (or haven't had) in some specific technology ("how much experience do you have with Crystal Reports 6?") that they're using and I wind up looking bad
Sometimes I just want to say "look you bastards, I got a degree in physics, I'm not an idiot and I know how to RTFM!"
What Daher is *really* trying to say: (Score:2)
Sounds like he just wants "paper engineers" to use as a marketing tool, and he's afraid that he won't be able to keep (often pronounced "don't want to pay") qualified people.
You can study for just about any certification wihout the full training run, however he'd rather send his people to a few-day course to learn the bare minimum as opposed to offering incentives to pass the test without expensive training.
He's got quit a dilemma here, though I'm not certified in anything, I hope Red Hat doesn't go the way of Microsoft and pass out valueless titles to people so these fly-by-night resellers can use them to "reassure" customers.
Re:Give Red Hat a break. (Score:2)
60K, you lose (Score:2)
BTW, I generally don't hire folks with certification. It doesn't prove a damn thing... but it does tell me a lot about the person who touts such certification as being valuable.
Re:Is Linux Certification Relevant (Score:2)
I am one of those who intensely dislikes certifications of any kind. I believe that certifications simply make HR departments lazy. I would rather take the guy with 20 years experience and no certification than the guy with 2 years experience and an MCSE.
I am an RHCE. I got involved with Linux in November, 1998, went to RedHat and was certified in June, 1999. During those months I spent a small fortune on books from O'Reilly, installed several servers and played a heck of a lot.
So, I'm opposed to certification yet I'm certified. I got certified for two reasons. One, we wanted to become a RedHat VAR and we had to have an RHCE on staff to do so. The second reason is that I believe we Linux users are on the frontlines in something of a computing revolution, revolutionaries need things that make them look more credible. In a world that is used to seeing CNEs and MCSEs, an RHCE is a credibility enhancer.
Stand Fast,
Welcome to the REAL real world (Score:2)
So Linux is a better solution than MS. Why? What makes it a better solution? Sure, it's a better OS. HOWEVER, if I'm implementing a platform, my idea of a "solution" goes far beyond just the OS. I'm looking at TCO, uptime, training, service, and support. If Red Hat can't provide me with these things at levels I consider acceptable, then maybe MS really is (gasp!) the better solution. (man, that was hard to say!) If they're going to charge me more for the poorer service, and then throw up stats (4% market share) at me, then screw 'em. Either give me a working, cost-effective solution, or don't waste my time.
Consider; I run linux at home. I really dislike MS products. For clients, I tend to recommend Solaris as a PC platform, because it's a stable, mature OS, with good support. Linux doesn't cut it in a lot of environments, and the support is a big reason!
OK, end of rant.
It's nice to have people pay you to do your job (Score:2)
This is not say there is not value in the test. There was a time when a CNE was a pretty smart person. But the same problem with the CNE tests also exist for MCSE. The tests don't change much. The never changes. It makes it easier for people to slip by who really shouldn't.
Usually there are two types of people in the IT field. Those who have "it"...and those who don't. I've found that the longer time goes by the less you can rely on a Title to dictate knowledge or skill level. People can cram for a test. When they get on the job they slip. The more interviews I have with the "highly" qualified MCSE the more I find that they are being pumped through for profit schools and that they lack the down and dirty basic knowledge of the computer. And example is a MCSE whom was asked how to install a NIC card. His reply was that he'd have "PC Support" people do it.
I've found there are people who barely have a high school diploma that have a better understanding of what's going on inside the computer than a CompSci Major with an MCSE.
This is where I think CISCO does a good job. Tests based on real problems. Have the student configure the router. Send them out to lunch and mess with it. They pass if they can fix it. These are real problem solving skills that can't be taught from a Dummies book. You have to understand what's going on. NOT ONLY HOW TO CONFIGURE SOMETHING, BUT WHY YOU CONFIGURE IT THAT WAY. You either have it or you don't.
Microsoft has a Vested Interest to keep Redhat Out (Score:2)
I don't think it would take that long to build up the number of trainers. But you need a place to give the tests.
Microsoft has a Vested Interest to keep Redhat Out (Score:2)
I don't think it would take that long to build up the number of trainers. But you need a place to give the tests.
Welcome to the real world (Score:2)
Let me get this straight. Red Hat sells Linux. Linux has 4% market share (I read that on
Riiiight!
And he's annoyed that once their people get trained they'll leave for better jobs! Boo Hoo! So sad! The poor baby.
While we're at it, I'll complain about the Italian restaurant with great ambience two towns over being farther away and more expensive than McDonnalds.
I guess he'll just take his ball home and play by himself.
Are people really this dumb? Are there people out there who are that incapable of putting two and two together to figure out the "Why" of a thing before they complain? I don't complain about my Olds having fewer safety features than other cars. I don't complain about the gas mileage, I know what I've got and I work with it!
BTW: I wouldn't attribute the article to FUD. Just people complaining about everything not being exactly the way they want it to be. Sorta like my reaction every time my work computer crashes. "$%*&@$ MS OS!"
Free certifications (Score:2)
The tests are timed; you get three minutes for each question and can't stop, so make sure you have a block of uninterrupted time available.
sounds like time for... (Score:2)
(PLOP).
just take the overall structure of the existing certifications and have the kommunity come up with realistic Q&A.
host it on valinux; it's free to study all questions and answers.
when you want to take the test, log in through a secure browser, pay valinux, and if you pass they send you a cert.
What so "wrong" with this picture?
Business Rule (Score:2)
Here's a newsflash for you. Some of the best and most loyal customers are not always the most knowledgeable. In those cases, a certification does help. There are a good number of employers that want to see certification as well.
In this market, skilled employees can move almost anywhere they want anytime, with or without certification.
Almost is the key word there. In some places, the job market is competitive. Some employers are real sticklers for exerience, and many are willing to waive some of their requirments if you show them a certification.
I have worked professionally on several different platforms. My *NIX clients never asked about any kind of certification. They were happy enough to find a developer that understood their system at all. My Win* clients had a bigger market to choose from. The certification served as a decent tool. I don't think that having a certification makes me more qualified than before. But now that I am certified, I know what I can expect certified individuals to know. I also know what I need to ask to gauge whether or not they can be useful developers.
Certifications have their uses. Wall ornements and toilet paper are only two uses, and probably not the best.
And there are other locations (Score:3)
Re:Prices -Check Again $2,498 (Score:3)
Give Red Hat a break: you, me and who else? (Score:3)
That's mostly true. But notice what: mom-and-pop shops around Walmarts have very low life expectancy, and the reasons for that have a lot to do with price and availability.
So given that we all like this particular mom-and-pop shop (hey, who's mom there?
seems like a misplaced complaint to say that Red Hat cannot compete with MS in certain ways. They can't. Get over it.
Well, if they can't, they'd better get off their ass pronto and do something about it. *I* will get over it, and *you* will get over it, but some middle manager at United Diapers will not see why *he* has to get over something -- so he'll go to Microsoft again.
To reiterate, if you think mom-and-pop vs Walmart comparison is valid, Red Hat better make sure it does not end up in exactly the same place where all these mom-and-pop shops have ended up.
Kaa
Is Linux Certification Relevant (Score:3)
Re:But how meaningful are the Certifications? (Score:3)
When I would go for an interview people would look at my resume and ask why I have my CNE, and not my MCSE. I snap right back at them, "Knowing what is needed to know to have a CNE gives me an unparallel understanding of Engineering Network Systems. Being an MCSE would give me an unparallel understanding of the Ctrl-Alt-Del combination." They understood.
I work with 3 MCSE's. They are tools. They might as well have been the models for the MCP dolls. I'll reviece a call about a server going down, or a workstation being kicked off the network, and their first reaction is to just reboot the system. Nevermind the fact that it is a production server. A server that people are accessing important E-Mail, or data from.
I don't blame them. Thats just what they were taught.
Re:The difference between a MCSE and RHCE (Score:3)
A) Pay mucho dinero for classes and a cert, or
B) Realize that the general tests (Basic Net, Wkstn, Srvr, etc) that aren't app specific are _really easy_ and a quick d/l of the free practice test will do for prep. The only rub is that the tests cost more than AP/SATs from ETS (yikes!), but in the long run, this doesn't make much difference...
I was able to do most of them without even ociking up any study materials. It isn't that hard if you can think a little bit and pay attention when you are navving around your box.
I haven't looked into the linux cert details, but it seems to be much more worthwhile than a piece of paper that says "Hi, I can install NT as a PDC, and run Back Office!" (replace NT with W2K as needed)...
The difference between the MSCE and RHCE certs seems like the difference between an IT major and an engineering major - "here's what you can do" to "here's what you can do, how you can do it, why you want to do it, and how it works"
my $.05 (darn oil prices)
RHCE is not Industry Standard (Score:3)
Noteably absent from the above list of companies is Red Hat. As a member of the Linux community, Red Hat should be working with others to help define standards for the entire industry, and not just itself. Adopting a mindset of "We're the standard, so you play by our rules." is not what the community wants to see and is not the way to accomplish this goal. Whether you're a Debian, SuSE, TurboLinux, or Caldera user... standards are critical to us all. They help make each of our lives significantly easier. Staying cohesive as a group also gives us additional strength. It seems difficult to expect that one rogue straggler could ever succeed. As with Linux itself, our success will be based on the efforts of the larger Community more than just the efforts of one company.
Also, as anyone who has worked with a vendor's own certification program will know, most of those non-standard programs are used more for marketing than independant analysis of knowledge. ("You barked the right marketing bullets, here's a bone. Good boy!") This is certainly true for the MCSE certification process (of which I am certified and have seen firsthand
Anyway, the whole argument of whether RHCE is better than MCSE seems more religious and inflammatory than what can possibly be answered in this setting. Both certainly will have their positive and negative points. However, if we choose to support something vendor-neutral such as the LPI we can, as a community, address the weaknesses.
(My comments are my own and don't necessarily reflect the opinions of TurboLinux.)
Aaron McKee
Clustering Products Manager
TurboLinux, Inc.
Fear and loathing in IT.. (Score:3)
"It's hard enough to find and keep talented IT people, and Red Hat is asking us not only to spend $5,000 a person, which eats heavily into our cost, but we also have to lose a $60,000 employee for two weeks, who after being certified, can move almost anywhere he wants, maybe even over to Red Hat. There aren't that many Linux-certified people out there."
This is the way my company feels about training. They would rather let me sit for 6 months toiling with a new concept, figure it out and start to use it than to send me on a 1 week course which would give me enough information to figure it out in a matter of weeks.
Their excuse is that if I get training I will leave, but what ends up happening is people get fed up with never being sent to learn new things but still expected to get the information so they leave and go somewhere that is interested in training people.
Now 6 months is a little extreme but I know some of our programmers toil for at least 6 months with some of this SAP crap before they become even remotely useful. Send them on a course or two over that 6 months and yo'd be getting a lot more work out of them.
I have no sympathy for someone who runs their company with that mentality. forgey
Re:Fear and loathing in IT.. (Score:3)
T - Toys. Engineers want to play with the latest toys.
E - Education. They want training on the latest stuff.
C - Cash. They need to be paid properly.
H - Harleys. This comes with the Cash.
S - Sex. This comes with the Cash and Harleys.
what costs what (Score:4)
How many server licenses does Microsoft have to ram down corporate throats to make up the "loss" leader on the certification. Plus which, certified techs just further entrench Microsoft so their just an arm of Microsoft's marketing evangelism team...
That's just servers, and not to mention all the desktop copies that were sold on a per CPU basis whether you wanted one or not. I'm sorry I've gotten lost... what was that twerp bitching about? Was she complaining about getting ripped off? :)
SCO Certification (Score:4)
Prices -Check Again $2,498 (Score:5)
I'm sure the airfare adds to the cost buy this is directly from Red Hat Training info [redhat.com]
Price:
The special introductory bundle price for this five-day course is $2,498 ($2099 for the training + $399 for the Certification Lab Exam, £1,599 in the UK).
Duration:
5 days
Training Start Time: 9:00 a.m.
Training End Time: 4:30-5:00PM (depending on class progress)
Training is also available through Global Knowledge [globalknowledge.com].
Against the anti-cert mentality (Score:5)
OK, I usually allow posts like these to roll off the monitor, but not this time. Seems like every time there's a story on certification, the anti-cert contingent rolls out of the woodwork. Fine. Now let's hear from the other side of the aisle.
I'm not employed by any vendor, nor am I employed to teach any vendor's curriculum, although I once was: I still hold CNI certification in addition to the other alphabet soup that I could staple at the end of my .signature file. I say that so that those who want to dismiss my viewpoint simply because I have a certification can do so immediately.
I do contribute occasionally to the LPI project [lpi.org].
Let me put this as delicately as I can: you have no idea what you're talking about, if you believe that a person can learn just as much about a system they've not worked with from a book and some play time, as they can from an instructor-led class. Now, I'm not saying that all instructors ran their classes as well as I did (and I have the trust of several companies in this town who continue to ask for me, even though I haven't worked the classroom for over a year), but I can say that if an instructor is worth a damn, and most of us are, then the only way you can use a self-study book to outstrip participation in my class is to ignore me and the curriculum, and sleep in the back row. If you do that, it's your own fault. The concept of certification isn't to blame here. It's shitty implementation on the part of some, not all.
Oh, yeah, right. That's why vendor certification programs are so popular among the best and brightest companies and people. They certify because they want to know that all those who are certified have taken exams demonstrating that they all have a certain minimum level of knowledge. Not "competence". The best test in the world won't prevent a well-trained bozo from screwing up your server. Competence isn't just knowledge, it's also judgement, and quite honestly: character. The best people I've worked with knew when to say "I don't know" from behind their multiple certifications. They were the smart ones. But the truth is, companies want to have the ability to say, "OK, our people will know at least as much as a CNE", and be able to learn that about their employees (and potential new-hires) by looking at a certificate. Does that guarantee competence? Of course not! But given all else equal... training, opportunity, experience... I'm more likely to give the nod to a certified engineer, because I know she's proven herself in testing. That isn't the only factor I'd apply, of course, but it carries weight. And I'm knowledgable, thank you.
Stop knocking certification. You want to knock the programs, go ahead. The instructors? Go ahead, but be ready to back yourself up with hard evidence. The companies who use certification as their only criterion? Please, feel free, and I'll join you! But to slam on the idea of certification itself shows lack of understanding, not only in the realm of corporate hiring practices, but in human pshycology as well.
The difference between a MCSE and RHCE (Score:5)
If you look at what the average MCSE learns and knows...
1) Learns what a kernel IS
2) Learns how to work with special GUI's to get done what they need.
3) Learns how to deal with a few special problems which require getting deep into the NOS's settings (the registry)... like I can count them on my finger.
4) You learn about the hardware you can use... and how to INSTALL the drivers.
Linux, is still (at least for now), inherently more difficult and to successfully understand and administer. You have to understand things on a much more detailed level.
1) You learn how to understand the messages that the Kernel spits at you... how to change on the kernel operates
2) You learn the cmd prompt utils needed to get your hands dirty. I don't have a argument for this one... just that everyone I have seen that has a understanding of (and especially those with a fetish for) can comprehend the hidden problems (when it comes to protocols or hardware) a whole lot quicker (less explaining needed).
3) You learn how to RTFM, something a MCSE may never learn...
4) You get into the details of every service and have to understand it at a technical level (because this is how all the documentation is written... I mean, its not just... do x y z, more like... do x because, y because, z because).
my 2c
- cyphunk
Those quoted prices are only partially correct. (Score:5)
You should only have to pay $5K if you take all of RedHat's training classes (4 total). And then the price would be pretty much inline with MSCE and CNE training costs.
The actual RedHat certification test (RH302) is $750. If your people are already knowledgeable about UNIX, but not necessarily Linux or RedHat, then the best option is to send them to RH300 which is a week long "rapid track" training class that includes the test. RH300 is $2700.
As far as locations, now that RedHat has partnered with GlobalKnowledge, you should be able to find a training center fairly close to you. See http://am.globalknowledge.com/redhat/index.html [globalknowledge.com] for more info.. A quick check at the GK site shows that RH302 is being offered in TX, DC, MN, CA, MA, NJ and CO in the coming months.
BTW, I don't work for RedHat or GlobalKnowledge. It just so happens that I recently went through (and passed) RH300.
My name is Mark, and I'm a RHCE (Score:5)
a) I could
b) My boss paid for it
c) I was at Red Hat the day they had their IPO
d) Nice ego boost, having used Linux for 8 years.
Anyway, the certification isn't easy unless you know Linux like the back of your hand. I can't really go into the details of the RHCE exam (hellooo NDA), but I'm pretty sure I can tell you that you *really* need to know what you're doing. It's more than just studying the manual the day before the exam and passing. Most of it isn't RH-specific, so if you knew Debian really well, you could take the week-long course and do just fine.
To be fair, I never took any of the CNE or MCSE exams, so I can't do a good comparison of the two.
Give Red Hat a break. (Score:5)
Sorry, but Red Hat is just a wee bit smaller than MS. They cannot yet afford to fly people all over the place. They cannot yet afford to have very low prices that come from immense volumes.
This whole rant seems like people who complain mom and pop shops can't compete with Walmart in price or availability. It takes little brainpower to realize why this is the case. But mom and pop shops have other benefits, such as more personalized service, and oftimes better product. So it just seems like a misplaced complaint to say that Red Hat cannot compete with MS in certain ways. They can't. Get over it.