Failed Exam 070-297

Discussion in 'MCSE' started by =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=, Mar 10, 2005.

  1. The rant below can be skipped, the quick question is: Are there direct lab
    guides that cover every topic in this exam?

    The rant:
    I've failed this stupid exam twice now shy of just 26 point each time. I
    cannot seem to find a good guide on the material tested in this exam. I have
    gone through the deployment guides, the training kit and the core training
    kit. I have set up a lab at home and gone through creating a single forest
    with child domains. In place upgrade or new forest. I've gotten the
    practice test from exam-prep; All of which fails to prepare me for a passing
    score.

    My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with much
    credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably become a
    paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat test
    (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But now
    we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect in the
    industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.

    My suggestion to microsoft? Make a REAL prep. I don't need a prep guide
    70-297 to waste chapters and time telling me what Active Directory is. If I
    don't know that by then, it's my own sorry @ss fault. This guide should be
    flat out LABS! and real ones that are complex. For example, the test has a
    question where some of your branch offices are workgroups- do I restructure
    them into new domains? I don't know- that wasn't in the deployment guide or
    exam prep. What about DNS deployments across non-contigous DNS names for top
    level trees in a forest? Don't, know wasn't in the prep
    guide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Or if we can't get that done- then be honest about this MCSE- don't bother
    taking it until you have implemented a multi-forest, multi-domain, clients 98
    - XP with Unix DNS servers which may or may not be on your peripheral network
    in a very large organization.

    anyway, now that I've whined - i feel better - know of any complex lab guides?
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=, Mar 10, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Wayne Guest

    Have you checked http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-297.asp and made
    sure you've covered all the areas in the objectives? If an exam question is
    outside of those listed objectives then you have a legitimate complaint, if
    not, try reading them before you resit.

    --

    Wayne McGlinn
    Brisbane, Oz

    "Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system
    of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the
    masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony"
    - Dennis (sometime in the middle ages)

    "cldpeak" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The rant below can be skipped, the quick question is: Are there direct
    > lab
    > guides that cover every topic in this exam?
    >
    > The rant:
    > I've failed this stupid exam twice now shy of just 26 point each time. I
    > cannot seem to find a good guide on the material tested in this exam. I
    > have
    > gone through the deployment guides, the training kit and the core training
    > kit. I have set up a lab at home and gone through creating a single
    > forest
    > with child domains. In place upgrade or new forest. I've gotten the
    > practice test from exam-prep; All of which fails to prepare me for a
    > passing
    > score.
    >
    > My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with much
    > credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably become a
    > paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat test
    > (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But now
    > we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect in
    > the
    > industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.
    >
    > My suggestion to microsoft? Make a REAL prep. I don't need a prep guide
    > 70-297 to waste chapters and time telling me what Active Directory is. If
    > I
    > don't know that by then, it's my own sorry @ss fault. This guide should
    > be
    > flat out LABS! and real ones that are complex. For example, the test has
    > a
    > question where some of your branch offices are workgroups- do I
    > restructure
    > them into new domains? I don't know- that wasn't in the deployment guide
    > or
    > exam prep. What about DNS deployments across non-contigous DNS names for
    > top
    > level trees in a forest? Don't, know wasn't in the prep
    > guide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > Or if we can't get that done- then be honest about this MCSE- don't bother
    > taking it until you have implemented a multi-forest, multi-domain, clients
    > 98
    > - XP with Unix DNS servers which may or may not be on your peripheral
    > network
    > in a very large organization.
    >
    > anyway, now that I've whined - i feel better - know of any complex lab
    > guides?
     
    Wayne, Mar 11, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Chuck Guest

    Dude,

    I hear you load and clear. I've never failed an exma yet, but I've come
    close because I don't believe the MS Courseware comes close to exam
    readiness, especially when some of the answers are product bugs, documented
    in the KB.

    My advice and I know some people will disagree is know your material and
    train on the TestKing.com exams. They are the real thing, and if you get
    stuff that was not in the test exam, the Testking will give you enough
    information to pass through the answers.

    At the end of the day, you need to decide what the MCSE means to you,
    because there'll always be "paper" smart people out there. The only way to
    distinguish yourself from them is through hard work and experience. That
    sets the proffessional asside from the amateur.

    Good luck.

    PS: check out it could save you $$$
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/offers/2ndshot/


    "cldpeak" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The rant below can be skipped, the quick question is: Are there direct
    > lab
    > guides that cover every topic in this exam?
    >
    > The rant:
    > I've failed this stupid exam twice now shy of just 26 point each time. I
    > cannot seem to find a good guide on the material tested in this exam. I
    > have
    > gone through the deployment guides, the training kit and the core training
    > kit. I have set up a lab at home and gone through creating a single
    > forest
    > with child domains. In place upgrade or new forest. I've gotten the
    > practice test from exam-prep; All of which fails to prepare me for a
    > passing
    > score.
    >
    > My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with much
    > credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably become a
    > paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat test
    > (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But now
    > we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect in
    > the
    > industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.
    >
    > My suggestion to microsoft? Make a REAL prep. I don't need a prep guide
    > 70-297 to waste chapters and time telling me what Active Directory is. If
    > I
    > don't know that by then, it's my own sorry @ss fault. This guide should
    > be
    > flat out LABS! and real ones that are complex. For example, the test has
    > a
    > question where some of your branch offices are workgroups- do I
    > restructure
    > them into new domains? I don't know- that wasn't in the deployment guide
    > or
    > exam prep. What about DNS deployments across non-contigous DNS names for
    > top
    > level trees in a forest? Don't, know wasn't in the prep
    > guide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > Or if we can't get that done- then be honest about this MCSE- don't bother
    > taking it until you have implemented a multi-forest, multi-domain, clients
    > 98
    > - XP with Unix DNS servers which may or may not be on your peripheral
    > network
    > in a very large organization.
    >
    > anyway, now that I've whined - i feel better - know of any complex lab
    > guides?
     
    Chuck, Mar 11, 2005
    #3
  4. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    catwalker63 Guest

    "Chuck" <> prattled ceaslessly in
    news::

    > My advice and I know some people will disagree is know your material
    > and train on the TestKing.com exams. They are the real thing, and if
    > you get stuff that was not in the test exam, the Testking will give
    > you enough information to pass through the answers.



    This is an A.S.S.F.U.C.K.E.R!! TestKing is a braindump. Braindumps are
    for cheaters! Cheaters are A.S.S.F.U.C.K.E.R.S!! Be a professional and
    stay away from these!

    --
    Catwalker
    aka Pu$$y Feet
    BS, MCP
    MCNGP #43
    www.mcngp.com
    faq.mcngp.com

    "Incredible! One of the worst performances of my career and they never
    doubted it for a second."
     
    catwalker63, Mar 11, 2005
    #4
  5. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    CBIC Guest


    > My advice and I know some people will disagree

    In this NG? Really? I can't believe that!

    > At the end of the day, you need to decide what the MCSE means to you,
    > because there'll always be "paper" smart people out there. The only
    > way to distinguish yourself from them is through hard work and
    > experience. That sets the proffessional asside from the amateur.
    >


    You talk about hard work yet you use tk. You are a hypocrite and an
    a$$fukcer. If you can't pass the exams without using dumps you don't deserve
    to be certified. I wish you a long miserable life concluded by a long
    painful death. I wish you the worst of luck because you ( and anyone else
    using dumps) are the scum of the earth.
    --
    aka
    Doom MCNGP #38
    www.mcngp.com and www.google.com are the best resources on the web
     
    CBIC, Mar 11, 2005
    #5
  6. Thanks Chuck-

    I see the strong negative opinions of testking but I appreciate the link-
    whether I use it or not depends on whether I pass this test after
    re-simulating everything in the deployment kit. I did skip some things in it
    because they did not apply to my organization. So if I do it all again and
    still fail this test, then I'll have to think about some other avenue like
    testking.

    In my opinion a brain dump is no different than boot camp- where I know
    people who had little or no experience in admin duties but went the to the
    boot camp and got thier paper mcse. They did a lot of studying while there,
    but that the exam questions were remarkably similar thier practice.
    Microsoft seems to view a boot camp as okay- where to me it's a brain dump
    that you just pay a lot more money for. How can you really only become a
    MCSE after one week?

    In looking for work, certification is one of the table legs that supports
    your carreer. Education and experience are the other factors- but that cert
    is what HR orgs scan for and reject resumes on, if it's not present,
    regardless of it's value.

    I think Microsoft needs to make a decision- do they want the MCSE to be of
    same value like a Cisco CCIE? If so, then I'm all for making it even harder.
    But then give me a exam preps that are thick - difficult and mostly complex
    labs that might take me 6 months to complete - that's fine with me. With
    virtual PC there's no reason not to able to simulate a complex environment.
    I think Microsoft tries to walk a balance of making hard, but not too hard-
    and has failed to make it vauled again among IT managers.

    I just want a single source to go to, complete and that anything that is on
    the exam will be covered. If I'm lazy, skipped a lab, or missed something and
    not pass, I know that I can return to this source and do it again.

    One last example, I even took the Microsoft Course for this exam. And it
    just turned out to be an instructor following the book examples from the
    microsoft developed course. Once again, the example labs were too simple and
    did not cover many logical designs required by the exam.

    "Chuck" wrote:

    > Dude,
    >
    > I hear you load and clear. I've never failed an exma yet, but I've come
    > close because I don't believe the MS Courseware comes close to exam
    > readiness, especially when some of the answers are product bugs, documented
    > in the KB.
    >
    > My advice and I know some people will disagree is know your material and
    > train on the TestKing.com exams. They are the real thing, and if you get
    > stuff that was not in the test exam, the Testking will give you enough
    > information to pass through the answers.
    >
    > At the end of the day, you need to decide what the MCSE means to you,
    > because there'll always be "paper" smart people out there. The only way to
    > distinguish yourself from them is through hard work and experience. That
    > sets the proffessional asside from the amateur.
    >
    > Good luck.
    >
    > PS: check out it could save you $$$
    > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/offers/2ndshot/
    >
    >
    > "cldpeak" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > The rant below can be skipped, the quick question is: Are there direct
    > > lab
    > > guides that cover every topic in this exam?
    > >
    > > The rant:
    > > I've failed this stupid exam twice now shy of just 26 point each time. I
    > > cannot seem to find a good guide on the material tested in this exam. I
    > > have
    > > gone through the deployment guides, the training kit and the core training
    > > kit. I have set up a lab at home and gone through creating a single
    > > forest
    > > with child domains. In place upgrade or new forest. I've gotten the
    > > practice test from exam-prep; All of which fails to prepare me for a
    > > passing
    > > score.
    > >
    > > My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with much
    > > credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably become a
    > > paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat test
    > > (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But now
    > > we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect in
    > > the
    > > industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.
    > >
    > > My suggestion to microsoft? Make a REAL prep. I don't need a prep guide
    > > 70-297 to waste chapters and time telling me what Active Directory is. If
    > > I
    > > don't know that by then, it's my own sorry @ss fault. This guide should
    > > be
    > > flat out LABS! and real ones that are complex. For example, the test has
    > > a
    > > question where some of your branch offices are workgroups- do I
    > > restructure
    > > them into new domains? I don't know- that wasn't in the deployment guide
    > > or
    > > exam prep. What about DNS deployments across non-contigous DNS names for
    > > top
    > > level trees in a forest? Don't, know wasn't in the prep
    > > guide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    > >
    > > Or if we can't get that done- then be honest about this MCSE- don't bother
    > > taking it until you have implemented a multi-forest, multi-domain, clients
    > > 98
    > > - XP with Unix DNS servers which may or may not be on your peripheral
    > > network
    > > in a very large organization.
    > >
    > > anyway, now that I've whined - i feel better - know of any complex lab
    > > guides?

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=, Mar 11, 2005
    #6
  7. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Neil Guest

    did you hear "=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?="
    <> say in
    news::

    > So if I do it all again and
    > still fail this test, then I'll have to think about some other avenue
    > like testking.
    >


    don't. no matter what cheating is not the answer to this. If you are
    caught MS will take away your certs (if you have any) and will not allow
    you to take another exam - ever. for life.

    check these out for more info:
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/faq/security.asp
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/program/piracy.asp
    http://www.cybercrime.gov/keppelPlea.htm

    --
    Neil MCNGP#30

    - I thought I was wrong once but I was mistaken.
     
    Neil, Mar 11, 2005
    #7
  8. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Briscobar Guest

    In news:,
    cldpeak <> rambled:
    >

    <snip>

    To add to Neil's last post, those links are great resources, and if being
    labeled a cheater or paper cert doesn't bother you, I hope that having your
    certs taken away will. Not to say that I wish anything like that upon you,
    I'm just hoping that you decide not to use TestKings or similar products.
    They are not studying, they're memorizing.

    You seem like a decent guy just struggling to get the certs. Keep at it, and
    don't quit, but please don't dump. It cheats the rest of us out of our
    hard-earned certifications. And, although I don't like to do it to anyone, I
    can guarantee that if you *do* dump, and you brag about it here, you will be
    reported to MS. They may or may not take appropriate action, but they'll at
    least know about you. Whether it's me or someone else who reports it to
    , it'll get done, and the results can't be pretty. So
    please dont' cheat - it's not learning, and it's not fair.

    --

    KB - MCNGP "silent thug" #26

    Briscobar AT gmail DOT com

    www.mcngp.com owes me 35 bucks.
     
    Briscobar, Mar 11, 2005
    #8
  9. cldpeak wrote:

    > So
    > if I do it all again and still fail this test, then I'll have to
    > think about some other avenue like testking.


    Sigh...

    Every once in a while, a seemingly literate, intelligent person posts
    something like this. I'm used to seeing these kinds of posts from complete
    idiots, but when someone who comes off as not completely clueless says it,
    it seriously saddens me.
     
    =?Utf-8?Q?Frisbee=C2=AE?=, Mar 11, 2005
    #9
  10. heck folks don't worry about it- I distrusted the flames that the testking
    post got, usually typing in cuss words lowers thier credibility to me.

    Since then, I did a google search and found they did start out as a brain
    dump. I never used a transcender to test to get my MCSE 4.0 and have always
    stuck with Microsoft recomendations in preparation to stay on the safe side.

    My issue, and bad mood, when I posted is that I think Microsoft's idea of
    preparing for this exam lacks a valid avenue of certification for those of us
    working full time and without the financial resources for boot camp (which in
    my eyes I'm suspicious of as a form of cheating as well, just very expensive)

    If Microsoft wants to make the MCSE 2003 a real certification, compared to
    NT 4.0, then they need to step up to the plate and provide resources that
    should and must take significant number of hours to complete.

    There should be a basic series that introduces concepts for those new to it.

    They already have a deployment kit that provides a broad education and solid
    reference I can use a work as well.

    But they still need and exam prep guide that is chocked full of labs; and
    force learning concepts that will be covered on the exam.

    Instead I have a supposed exam prep kit wasting my time reading about and
    introduction to WINS, b-node and what NetBIOS is. By the time I hit the exam
    prep guide- such basic knowledge should be assumed and not covered. When
    I've got real work to get done, I don't want to waste time reading something
    that is so basic it won't be asked on the test. But I can't skip reading it,
    in case there's some important concept burried in the fluff.

    Instead, lets have a lab that teaches what will be on the test, such
    forwarding DNS requests to WINS, replication between WINS - and a flow chart
    that provides the test's opinion of the "most" correct answer when chosing
    WINS replication partners.

    I would rather spend $125 on such an exam prep that was worth the money,
    teaching the concepts by doing- then spend the same on failing the test.
    Because were not just talking about me losing $125- but also the billable
    hours I lose wasting time on test that I'm not prepared for.

    Finally, and most important- I obviously don't understand some important
    concepts, otherwise I would not continue to fail this exam. This affects the
    quality of my work- which I'm more concerned about than the MCSE- and after
    the test, there is no way to discover what it is I'm missing.

    If preparing for these exams, the best bet is the deployment kit, the
    Microsoft curriculum class it at training centers is a waste of money as well
    as the the self paced training kit. Allthough the core training kit would
    have been okay if I was starting out in IT for the first time. The Microsoft
    sactioned "selftest" exam practice software was good, it got me thinking some
    gotchas that might be found on the test.

    Anyway, thanks for your input and the heads up on testking- But there is a
    need to take another step here in the exam prep kits.


    "Frisbee®" wrote:

    > cldpeak wrote:
    >
    > > So
    > > if I do it all again and still fail this test, then I'll have to
    > > think about some other avenue like testking.

    >
    > Sigh...
    >
    > Every once in a while, a seemingly literate, intelligent person posts
    > something like this. I'm used to seeing these kinds of posts from complete
    > idiots, but when someone who comes off as not completely clueless says it,
    > it seriously saddens me.
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=, Mar 11, 2005
    #10
  11. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Neil Guest

    did you hear "=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?="
    <> say in
    news::

    > this exam lacks a valid avenue of certification for
    > those of us working full time

    <snip>
    > If Microsoft wants to make the MCSE 2003 a real certification,
    > compared to NT 4.0, then they need to step up to the plate and provide
    > resources that should and must take significant number of hours to
    > complete.
    >


    I'm confused. DO you want the exams harder or easier. do you think that you
    will be able to find more hours to prep if Microsoft lays out tons of
    courses for you? I'm not being funny here, I'm just trying to understand.
    I'm all for making the exams harder as that will increase teh value of the
    certification, but you have had less than stellar success so far and have
    indicated that you might not have enough hours in the day.

    Wayne did point you to the prep guide and there is a "Skills being
    measured" section. The problem is that "design" is a odd fish and the exams
    (since Win2k) have reflected this. Often these exams are about what
    information you can glean from the information given. If you work in the
    field and do installations for customers you know that the more questions
    you ask, the clearer picture of what they really want will emerge. Often
    what they want is either impossible, cost prohibative, or the wrong
    solution. To quote House "patients lie". So you need to treat based on the
    facts, not what the patients are complaining about. You have to dig to find
    out what they need vs what they want. "I want to have a single AD Site"
    might not be the best idea for a company with 20 locations connected by 56k
    modems for example.

    This is particularly difficult when you don't get to ask questions of the
    customer (as in the exam) so you have to often read between the lines. You
    seem a fairly literate guy, so telling you to read carefully is something I
    don't think you need to be told. Unfortunately, the best prep for this
    (Design) is real world. It can't be taught (well it can, but usually only
    by someone who has suffered through it themsleves).

    so then on to other issues. Do some books get too basic? yup and if they
    aren't you get complaints that it's too difficult - please don't assume
    that the reader knows whats going on. If you think that there is a book out
    there that is custom tailored to you, please let me know what it is? Would
    it be nice if MS told you which questions you got wrong? Sure, and we don't
    have braindump problems. Should they bring back the section scores? YES!
    that one I will agree with ( and
    though I doubt that it will make much of a difference)

    As for the MOC being a waste of time and money, you have my condolences.
    Usually the reason why these courses are of no use can be blamed on one of
    2 things. the Courseware or the Trainer. If you feel the courseware was
    inadequate, make SURE you tell MS when filling out the MTM form (that web
    page that trainers send you to at the end of the course). Likewise if its
    the trainer. MS takes the post course evaluations very seriously now and a
    less than stellar trainer is shown the door.

    I can assure you, as a trainer, I know that there is no such thing as
    perfect courseware or perfect trainers. A good trainer can often make up
    for not so great courseware and hopefully this expereince will not sour you
    to all MCT delivered courses. We do as a community work very hard to
    deliver the course in an effective manner, but I have not taught a course
    as if you were going to leave my class and take the exam. Many of my
    students have no intention on writing the exams and are there to learn
    enough to implement that product/technology.

    finally, if certification is your goal, don't give up. Although it is an
    expensive method, you are learning things even if you fail an exam (eddison
    said something about find 9,999 ways not to make a light bulb or something
    like that). If it means anything I failed my first MCP exam twice. That was
    about 30 MS exams and about 60 total exams ago. keep at it and good luck on
    the next kick at the kitty. (sorry Kat/Catwalker)

    --
    Neil MCNGP#30

    - Do invisible cats drink evaporated milk?
     
    Neil, Mar 11, 2005
    #11
  12. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    molsonexpert Guest

    "Neil" <guess!!!@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:Xns9616A2BB84C82neilmcsegmailcom@207.46.248.16...
    > did you hear "=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?="
    > <> say in
    > news::
    >
    > > this exam lacks a valid avenue of certification for
    > > those of us working full time

    > <snip>
    > > If Microsoft wants to make the MCSE 2003 a real certification,
    > > compared to NT 4.0, then they need to step up to the plate and provide
    > > resources that should and must take significant number of hours to
    > > complete.
    > >

    >
    > I'm confused. DO you want the exams harder or easier. do you think that

    you
    > will be able to find more hours to prep if Microsoft lays out tons of
    > courses for you? I'm not being funny here, I'm just trying to understand.
    > I'm all for making the exams harder as that will increase teh value of the
    > certification, but you have had less than stellar success so far and have
    > indicated that you might not have enough hours in the day.
    >
    > Wayne did point you to the prep guide and there is a "Skills being
    > measured" section. The problem is that "design" is a odd fish and the

    exams
    > (since Win2k) have reflected this. Often these exams are about what
    > information you can glean from the information given. If you work in the
    > field and do installations for customers you know that the more questions
    > you ask, the clearer picture of what they really want will emerge. Often
    > what they want is either impossible, cost prohibative, or the wrong
    > solution. To quote House "patients lie". So you need to treat based on the
    > facts, not what the patients are complaining about. You have to dig to

    find
    > out what they need vs what they want. "I want to have a single AD Site"
    > might not be the best idea for a company with 20 locations connected by

    56k
    > modems for example.
    >
    > This is particularly difficult when you don't get to ask questions of the
    > customer (as in the exam) so you have to often read between the lines. You
    > seem a fairly literate guy, so telling you to read carefully is something

    I
    > don't think you need to be told. Unfortunately, the best prep for this
    > (Design) is real world. It can't be taught (well it can, but usually only
    > by someone who has suffered through it themsleves).
    >
    > so then on to other issues. Do some books get too basic? yup and if they
    > aren't you get complaints that it's too difficult - please don't assume
    > that the reader knows whats going on. If you think that there is a book

    out
    > there that is custom tailored to you, please let me know what it is? Would
    > it be nice if MS told you which questions you got wrong? Sure, and we

    don't
    > have braindump problems. Should they bring back the section scores? YES!
    > that one I will agree with ( and
    > though I doubt that it will make much of a difference)
    >
    > As for the MOC being a waste of time and money, you have my condolences.
    > Usually the reason why these courses are of no use can be blamed on one of
    > 2 things. the Courseware or the Trainer. If you feel the courseware was
    > inadequate, make SURE you tell MS when filling out the MTM form (that web
    > page that trainers send you to at the end of the course). Likewise if its
    > the trainer. MS takes the post course evaluations very seriously now and a
    > less than stellar trainer is shown the door.
    >
    > I can assure you, as a trainer, I know that there is no such thing as
    > perfect courseware or perfect trainers. A good trainer can often make up
    > for not so great courseware and hopefully this expereince will not sour

    you
    > to all MCT delivered courses. We do as a community work very hard to
    > deliver the course in an effective manner, but I have not taught a course
    > as if you were going to leave my class and take the exam. Many of my
    > students have no intention on writing the exams and are there to learn
    > enough to implement that product/technology.
    >
    > finally, if certification is your goal, don't give up. Although it is an
    > expensive method, you are learning things even if you fail an exam

    (eddison
    > said something about find 9,999 ways not to make a light bulb or something
    > like that). If it means anything I failed my first MCP exam twice. That

    was
    > about 30 MS exams and about 60 total exams ago. keep at it and good luck

    on
    > the next kick at the kitty. (sorry Kat/Catwalker)
    >
    > --
    > Neil MCNGP#30
    >
    > - Do invisible cats drink evaporated milk?


    You got my vote for rant of the month. Take a bow, and a deep breath, and
    not necessarily in that order.

    steve.
     
    molsonexpert, Mar 11, 2005
    #12
  13. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Neil Guest

    did you hear "molsonexpert" <> say in news:ub$3c7nJFHA.3484
    @TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:

    > You got my vote for rant of the month.


    didn't mean to rant at all. But I did have WAAAAAAAY too much to say...
    ;)

    --
    Neil MCNGP#30

    - When in trouble, delegate.
     
    Neil, Mar 11, 2005
    #13
  14. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    catwalker63 Guest

    "=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=" <> prattled
    ceaslessly in news::
    > My issue, and bad mood, when I posted is that I think Microsoft's idea
    > of preparing for this exam lacks a valid avenue of certification for
    > those of us working full time and without the financial resources for
    > boot camp (which in my eyes I'm suspicious of as a form of cheating as
    > well, just very expensive)
    >

    <snip>

    We're not denying that there are some shortcomings in the exam prep and
    testing process. You can, with a little imagination, come up with some
    labs of your own to test what is being presented and this is a mark of a
    good IT Professional. I don't think it's practical to expect one
    resource to have everything though. I use more than one resource because
    one author will do better explaining one concept and not so good on
    another -- the nature of being human. I also think the way they present
    the information in the training kits is important -- if you don't have
    the facts, the rules, the guidelines for DNS, WINS, DHCP, etc. down pat,
    you will not be able to figure out how to apply them. Keep plugging,
    you'll get there.

    --
    Catwalker
    aka Pu$$y Feet
    BS, MCP
    MCNGP #43
    www.mcngp.com
    faq.mcngp.com

    "Incredible! One of the worst performances of my career and they never
    doubted it for a second."
     
    catwalker63, Mar 11, 2005
    #14
  15. cldpeak wrote:
    > My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with

    much
    > credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably

    become a
    > paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat

    test
    > (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But

    now
    > we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect

    in the
    > industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.


    This does bug me a little - to your average recruiter (many whom I've
    discovered know about as much about IT as my grandmother does), an MCSE
    is an MCSE. The braindumper who aced the MCSE NT 4.0 cert 7 years ago
    is regarded in the same light as someone who busts ass going the more
    difficult yet more topical / current Windows Server 2003 route. You can
    put "MCSE Windows Server 2003" on your resume but no one really cares
    as long as you have an MCSE.

    Meanwhile, the increases in difficulty between the NT 4.0 track and the
    2000 track and the 2000 and 2003 track are enormous.

    Microsoft ought to do more to differentiate the certs and reward the
    people who are learning the newest technologies with a title that
    actually means something as it is the 2003 MCSErs who are going to make
    the strongest arguments to our bosses to allocate hefty portions of the
    IT budget towards upgrading their NT 4 Servers to 2003 (and yeah,
    plenty of companies out there are still on NT 4...)
     
    blastingfonda, Mar 11, 2005
    #15
  16. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Neil Guest

    did you hear catwalker63 <> say in
    news:Xns9616877CEE52Fcatwalker63athotmail@216.196.97.136:

    > You can, with a little imagination, come up with some
    > labs of your own to test


    Sybex has labs in the books don't they?


    --
    Neil MCNGP#30

    - File not found. Should I fake it? (Y/N)
     
    Neil, Mar 11, 2005
    #16
  17. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    Chuck Guest

    I totally agree with blastingfonda's comments. The main reason I keep
    getting certified is because of the recruiters out there who can't tell a
    good candidate appart from the bad without the MCSE certs to go. Don't get
    me wrong, this is no guarantee of a good candidate, but it's the recruiters
    entry criteria for many roles. Recruiters don't care whether it was NT4.0,
    2000 or W2k3 streams of certs. I have worked on some of the largest AD /2003
    implementations around and found that the tested material had little
    relevance to the real world, so why do we put so much into getting there??

    I take piracy very seriously, but the microsoft view on it's test content is
    risible when they have been working with SelfTestSoftware and OTHERS! I used
    Selftestsoftware for one exam, and it was pretty close to the real deal. So
    when Microsoft recommends' them, it's ok, but if it's someone else making a
    buck it's cheating.

    Thanks for the links Neil - they are very interesting ! However if MS are
    serious about this, they can start immediate proceedings against 100's of
    providers, they can locate them using a search engine like google! This
    situation has a ring of familiarity with the flagrant piracy of Windows 3.11
    years ago that ensured MSs' survival for years to come - hear me out on
    this, because by "tolerating" people who use TestKing and SeflTest, MS is
    ensuring that people are getting certified and that they are making money.
    The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

    I don't understand flamers who can't express themselves without swearing at
    total strangers on the net, do it to someone in the street if you got the
    guts and check out their reaction.

    Chuck.


    "blastingfonda" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > cldpeak wrote:
    >> My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with

    > much
    >> credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably

    > become a
    >> paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat

    > test
    >> (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But

    > now
    >> we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect

    > in the
    >> industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.

    >
    > This does bug me a little - to your average recruiter (many whom I've
    > discovered know about as much about IT as my grandmother does), an MCSE
    > is an MCSE. The braindumper who aced the MCSE NT 4.0 cert 7 years ago
    > is regarded in the same light as someone who busts ass going the more
    > difficult yet more topical / current Windows Server 2003 route. You can
    > put "MCSE Windows Server 2003" on your resume but no one really cares
    > as long as you have an MCSE.
    >
    > Meanwhile, the increases in difficulty between the NT 4.0 track and the
    > 2000 track and the 2000 and 2003 track are enormous.
    >
    > Microsoft ought to do more to differentiate the certs and reward the
    > people who are learning the newest technologies with a title that
    > actually means something as it is the 2003 MCSErs who are going to make
    > the strongest arguments to our bosses to allocate hefty portions of the
    > IT budget towards upgrading their NT 4 Servers to 2003 (and yeah,
    > plenty of companies out there are still on NT 4...)
    >
     
    Chuck, Mar 11, 2005
    #17
  18. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    catwalker63 Guest

    Neil <guess!!!@gmail.com> prattled ceaslessly in
    news:Xns9616AB2DDBCFAneilmcsegmailcom@207.46.248.16:

    > did you hear catwalker63 <> say in
    > news:Xns9616877CEE52Fcatwalker63athotmail@216.196.97.136:
    >
    >> You can, with a little imagination, come up with some
    >> labs of your own to test

    >
    > Sybex has labs in the books don't they?
    >
    >


    I think perhaps the OP's complaint is that the labs are too simplistic.

    --
    Catwalker
    aka Pu$$y Feet
    BS, MCP
    MCNGP #43
    www.mcngp.com
    faq.mcngp.com

    "Incredible! One of the worst performances of my career and they never
    doubted it for a second."
     
    catwalker63, Mar 11, 2005
    #18
  19. blastingfonda and Chuck put it better than I can- but I still appreciate
    Neil's encouragement.

    I'm very frustrated on acheiving an MCSE just for the line entry on a
    resume. I would not be complaining about the diffuculty of uncovering the
    information and "imagination" required to create my own labs if the cert had
    the same respect as the CCIE. But the simple fact is that it does not.

    Some years ago, I took a temporary job as a analyst answering the phone on a
    help desk- I did it to get by while we moved to a new area and I searched for
    a better job. I'm sure you've guessed already, the first requirement was a
    certified MCSE. I think that clearly illuminates it's perceived value.

    So now as I elevate my cert, I find it extremely frustrating that it will
    take considerable more expense and time, for a cert that is still in danger
    of being used as resume qualifier for help desk technicians.

    However, to take some advice- of course I looked at the concepts being
    measured by the exam- I got a warm fuzzy feeling and everything. But that's
    not going to tell me that one of the questions will be about exporting Unix
    accounts and passwords then importing them with ldifde- but do you remember
    if you can encrypt the exported file or not? and if you do, is it because
    you did it once?

    I suspect that most people, like me will remember something because they
    actually had to do it. That's all I'm saying about an effective exam prep.
    It must have large complex labs where such a fact is buried in the process of
    doing the lab. This way you don't have an "easy" paper MCSE- you have to do
    the work.

    I don't mind commiting hours and hours to a task to get it right (otherwise
    IT is not a good career choice eh?) - but it's the WASTED time of taking an
    exam and following an exam prep that did not add anything to my core
    knowledge.

    Most disturbing is where do I go from here? My original post is about that,
    and I think there's not much more short of direct experience admin a large,
    mixed OS network and multiple attempts at the exam.

    If that's Microsoft's goal- that it's near impossible to pass the MCSE until
    you have directly administered a large, mixed OS, AD network for a number of
    years. That's fine, just let me know up front so that I don't waste money on
    an exam prep and time in a exam I'm not prepared for. Then let's throw some
    real marketing behind it so that HR orgs know the MCSE is not for the average
    help desk.

    Let's also get rid of those boot camps- they cheapen the cert just as much
    as a brain dump - once hiring managers find out if you've got the bucks you
    can almost buy your cert.

    I don't think by idea for a very complex lab exam prep guide is
    unreasonable. You would not say- "ah this part in the lab will be tested
    on..." You simply build labs that are large, really teach the basics and the
    advanced; then draw your pool of questions on the actions the labs perform.

    For this exam in particular I realize part of it is to listen to the
    interviews and draw your design from them, again this could be simulated in
    the lab. Perhaps you draw the wrong design, get further in the lab and
    discover it will not work. Now you've really learned something without
    having that painful lesson in front of real client, you won't forget it and
    it's still difficult to obtain the MCSE.

    However, to develop such a great exam prep material is expensive without a
    lot of revenue in return and perhaps we don't want to upset those training
    partners? Fine, then put those tough labs in the training center- I'll save
    my nickels again if I know it will do some good.

    Now I've really wasted some time on whining- better go start warming up my
    AD lab servers again- at least the hardware is cheaper these days, so it's
    probably a wash.
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=, Mar 12, 2005
    #19
  20. =?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=

    catwalker63 Guest

    Is this your first exam? Do the design exam last!! Start with Server or
    Professional!!

    --
    Catwalker
    aka Pu$$y Feet
    BS, MCP
    MCNGP #43
    www.mcngp.com
    faq.mcngp.com

    "Incredible! One of the worst performances of my career and they never
    doubted it for a second."
     
    catwalker63, Mar 12, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. hussnain ali

    needs 070,310and 070,229 tests

    hussnain ali, Dec 18, 2003, in forum: MCSD
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    608
    Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)
    Dec 24, 2003
  2. Raj Singh

    070-175 & 070-176

    Raj Singh, Feb 3, 2004, in forum: MCSD
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    502
    Raj Singh
    Feb 3, 2004
  3. Randall
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    443
    Kian Wah, Lai
    Jul 21, 2003
  4. =?Utf-8?B?QmxldGNoMTk3MQ==?=

    MCSD Upgrade Exams (070-553 & 070-554)

    =?Utf-8?B?QmxldGNoMTk3MQ==?=, May 15, 2006, in forum: MCSD
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,693
  5. Gargi

    exam 070-536 and 070-528

    Gargi, Sep 24, 2008, in forum: MCTS
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    775
    Gajanan
    Oct 2, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page