MCSE 2000 or 2003???

Discussion in 'MCSE' started by Jason P. Russell, May 16, 2004.

  1. Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice on.
    Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I normally
    work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal training.
    The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to send
    me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that the
    school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also Cisco's
    CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any advice
    you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum and
    email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.

    Jason P. Russell
     
    Jason P. Russell, May 16, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jason P. Russell

    TechGeekPro Guest

    Check this out: http://tinyurl.com/2ogsn

    --
    I may not be completely certified, but I am completely certifiable.

    "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice on.
    > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I normally
    > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    training.
    > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    send
    > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that the
    > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    Cisco's
    > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any advice
    > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    and
    > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    >
    > Jason P. Russell
    >
    >
    >
     
    TechGeekPro, May 16, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jason P. Russell

    Neil Guest

    "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in news:NXLpc.31029
    $bS1.20477@okepread02:

    > Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams.


    yes...

    --
    Neil MCNGP #30
    "you'd do what, to who, for how many biscuits?"
     
    Neil, May 17, 2004
    #3
  4. Jason P. Russell

    M0@RRi Guest

    Take the 2003. After all is so similiar to 2000, with this training you'll
    be able to manage both, but the most important you will be a MSCE 2003.

    "Jason P. Russell" <> escribió en el mensaje
    news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice on.
    > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I normally
    > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    training.
    > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    send
    > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that the
    > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    Cisco's
    > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any advice
    > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    and
    > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    >
    > Jason P. Russell
    >
    >
    >
     
    M0@RRi, May 18, 2004
    #4
  5. Jason P. Russell

    MikeF Guest


    > "Jason P. Russell" <> escribió en el mensaje
    > news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...

    <snip>
    > > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    > send
    > > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that

    the
    > > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    > Cisco's
    > > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any

    advice
    > > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    > and
    > > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    > >
    > > Jason P. Russell
    > >


    and "M0@RRi" <> propounded
    news:OJTZ$...
    > Take the 2003. After all is so similiar to 2000, with this training you'll
    > be able to manage both, but the most important you will be a MSCE 2003.


    Perfecto correcto! If you learn 2003, all you'll have to do to master 2000
    is find out what you can't do with it. If you learn 2000, you'll have to
    learn all the new things you can do with 2003. Seems to me the first is
    easier - and if you've already been using 2000, it's definitely easier - and
    you will have the later cert. So lobby like hell for a school that will
    provide a course in 2003.

    Mike
     
    MikeF, May 20, 2004
    #5
  6. Jason P. Russell

    Zenner Guest

    Study what you use. If the military is using W2K, then you should take the
    2000 course, trying to get certified on something DO NOT KNOW, is foolish.If
    you are talking about an actual training class, not a class that will teach
    you how to pass the test...then take 2003...however, most legitimate
    training classes are longer than a "few" months, usually closer to 6 - 12
    months according to how often the classes are scheduled and the amount of
    work you spend after class hours.

    I sincerely doubt if the military will upgrade to windows 2003 until late in
    its life cycle. All you will be doing is putting more stress on yourself,
    adding confusion when you get back on a W2K system and still have gaps in
    your knowledge on your actual working system. I agree, it would be nice to
    skip a generation and be on front of the curve in stead of riding the top,
    but it isn't always the best wy to do stuff.

    Think about it, many companies are STILL running WindowsNT. Many Windows
    2000 shops have yet to use all the features of that OS, many are just now
    starting to implement Active Directory, DDNS and trust DHCP.

    I think you would be better off taking Window 2000, then take the Upgrade
    exams after you get more experience and confidence. When it comes to IT,
    it's better to be really good at what you do, know it in depth, than
    mediocre at something peole tell you to take, because it the latest thing.
    There will always be another latest thing, but there are very few really
    good, gifted IT people. They are the guys making the big bucks after
    discharge.
    "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice on.
    > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I normally
    > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    training.
    > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    send
    > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that the
    > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    Cisco's
    > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any advice
    > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    and
    > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    >
    > Jason P. Russell
    >
    >
    >



    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.688 / Virus Database: 449 - Release Date: 5/18/2004
     
    Zenner, May 20, 2004
    #6
  7. "Zenner" <> wrote in message
    news:cQ8rc.51664$...
    > Study what you use. If the military is using W2K, then you should take the
    > 2000 course, trying to get certified on something DO NOT KNOW, is

    foolish.If
    > you are talking about an actual training class, not a class that will

    teach
    > you how to pass the test...then take 2003...however, most legitimate
    > training classes are longer than a "few" months, usually closer to 6 - 12
    > months according to how often the classes are scheduled and the amount of
    > work you spend after class hours.
    >
    > I sincerely doubt if the military will upgrade to windows 2003 until late

    in
    > its life cycle. All you will be doing is putting more stress on yourself,
    > adding confusion when you get back on a W2K system and still have gaps in
    > your knowledge on your actual working system. I agree, it would be nice to
    > skip a generation and be on front of the curve in stead of riding the top,
    > but it isn't always the best wy to do stuff.
    >
    > Think about it, many companies are STILL running WindowsNT. Many Windows
    > 2000 shops have yet to use all the features of that OS, many are just now
    > starting to implement Active Directory, DDNS and trust DHCP.
    >
    > I think you would be better off taking Window 2000, then take the Upgrade
    > exams after you get more experience and confidence. When it comes to IT,
    > it's better to be really good at what you do, know it in depth, than
    > mediocre at something peole tell you to take, because it the latest thing.
    > There will always be another latest thing, but there are very few really
    > good, gifted IT people. They are the guys making the big bucks after
    > discharge.
    > "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    > news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice

    on.
    > > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I

    normally
    > > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    > training.
    > > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    > send
    > > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that

    the
    > > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    > Cisco's
    > > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any

    advice
    > > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    > and
    > > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    > >
    > > Jason P. Russell
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    > ---
    > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    > Version: 6.0.688 / Virus Database: 449 - Release Date: 5/18/2004
    >
    >

    Thanks to everyone who responded to my post. After talking to some other
    people both online and off, I've decided to follow Zenner's advice and take
    the MCSE 2000 exams and then upgrade later to 2003. The command I will be
    transferring to uses 2000, but I only have experience with NT- so I really
    need to learn 2000 and worry about 2003 later. As for an update, I started
    the school on Monday and we are reading, studying, and testing on the ENTIRE
    CCNA Cisco Certified Network Associate Exam 640-801 Study Guide (Todd
    Lammle, Fourth Edition) by this coming Tuesday- a lot for 6 days! Anyway,
    thanks again to everyone who responded.

    Jason P. Russell
     
    Jason P. Russell, May 21, 2004
    #7
  8. Jason P. Russell

    Neil Guest

    "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in news:vhgrc.1626$bF3.393
    @fed1read01:

    > Todd
    > Lammle, Fourth Edition


    nice. good study guide. I used an earlier edition for my CCNA. Self
    study...

    --
    Neil MCNGP #30
    "you'd do what, to who, for how many biscuits?"
     
    Neil, May 21, 2004
    #8
  9. Jason P. Russell

    Kosh Guest

    "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice on.
    > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I normally
    > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    training.
    > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    send
    > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that the
    > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    Cisco's
    > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any advice
    > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    and
    > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    >
    > Jason P. Russell
    >


    Take the 2000 Tests.
    Then do the Upgrade.
    You'll end up with 2 MCSEs and A MCSA along the way and Do the CCNA to boot

    If Uncle Sam is Paying for the Training take advantage of it.
    Also you don't say if your going to Re up or already have.

    But if not try to get or Keep any Security clearances you have or can get.
    There are a lot of private sector Defense Contractor Job's out there also
    DHS Job's
    but they almost all require that you have had Active Clearances in the last
    2 years.
     
    Kosh, May 25, 2004
    #9
  10. Jason P. Russell

    Hout Bay Guest

    Jason

    I would seriously look at starting with Windows 2003 server. Microsoft has a
    history of stopping certifications to "encourage" the existing base of
    professionals to go out and "upgrade". Unless you really need 2000, go for
    2003.

    Cheers
    Barry
    www.i2ko.com


    "Kosh" <The Last of > wrote in message
    news:VTCsc.11967$Sx2.7117@okepread01...
    >
    > "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    > news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice

    on.
    > > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I

    normally
    > > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    > training.
    > > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    > send
    > > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that

    the
    > > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    > Cisco's
    > > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any

    advice
    > > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    > and
    > > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    > >
    > > Jason P. Russell
    > >

    >
    > Take the 2000 Tests.
    > Then do the Upgrade.
    > You'll end up with 2 MCSEs and A MCSA along the way and Do the CCNA to

    boot
    >
    > If Uncle Sam is Paying for the Training take advantage of it.
    > Also you don't say if your going to Re up or already have.
    >
    > But if not try to get or Keep any Security clearances you have or can get.
    > There are a lot of private sector Defense Contractor Job's out there also
    > DHS Job's
    > but they almost all require that you have had Active Clearances in the

    last
    > 2 years.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    Hout Bay, May 27, 2004
    #10
  11. Try to see if you can tackle the 2000 Exams, when you do, take the upgrade
    exams for 2003. You may want to take 2003 exams individually but be careful
    with the 294 Exam---VERY DIFFICULT to pass.

    "TechGeekPro" <%username%@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Check this out: http://tinyurl.com/2ogsn
    >
    > --
    > I may not be completely certified, but I am completely certifiable.
    >
    > "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    > news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice

    on.
    > > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I

    normally
    > > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    > training.
    > > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    > send
    > > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that

    the
    > > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    > Cisco's
    > > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any

    advice
    > > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    > and
    > > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    > >
    > > Jason P. Russell
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Edward Melvin U. Javier, Aug 27, 2004
    #11
  12. Jason P. Russell

    Rowdy Yates Guest

    "Edward Melvin U. Javier" <> wrote in
    news:uRuXc.561$Mf.308@fed1read02:

    > Try to see if you can tackle the 2000 Exams, when you do, take the
    > upgrade exams for 2003. You may want to take 2003 exams individually
    > but be careful with the 294 Exam---VERY DIFFICULT to pass.
    >


    i did the 2000 track and the 2003 upgrades. the upgrade exams were actually
    very easy.

    --
    Rowdy Yates, MCNGP #39
    http://rowdy_yates2.tripod.com/
    http://profiles.yahoo.com/rowdy_yates_mcngp
     
    Rowdy Yates, Aug 27, 2004
    #12
  13. Jason P. Russell

    Neil Guest

    babbling on and on again Rowdy Yates <> spewed
    in news:Xns9551ECD057859rowdyyates2123@207.46.248.16:

    > the upgrade exams were actually
    > very easy.
    >


    true

    --
    Neil MCNGP #30
    the "curious" hair on the soap of society
     
    Neil, Aug 27, 2004
    #13
  14. circa Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:01:24 -0400, in
    microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Edward Melvin U. Javier (hrdwrker9
    @hotmail.com) said,
    > but be careful
    > with the 294 Exam---VERY DIFFICULT to pass.
    >
    >

    Good to know I set a high curve by taking the beta, then. ;-)

    Laura
    --
    Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    -Oscar Wilde
     
    Laura A. Robinson, Aug 28, 2004
    #14
  15. Jason P. Russell

    Rubber Steve Guest

    "Edward Melvin U. Javier" <> wrote in message
    news:uRuXc.561$Mf.308@fed1read02...
    > Try to see if you can tackle the 2000 Exams, when you do, take the upgrade
    > exams for 2003. You may want to take 2003 exams individually but be

    careful
    > with the 294 Exam---VERY DIFFICULT to pass.


    Gimme a break. NOTHING on ANY Microsoft exam is calculus...
     
    Rubber Steve, Aug 28, 2004
    #15
  16. Jason P. Russell

    Rowdy Yates Guest

    "Rubber Steve" <> wrote in
    news:l3VXc.3572$:

    > "Edward Melvin U. Javier" <> wrote in message
    > news:uRuXc.561$Mf.308@fed1read02...
    >> Try to see if you can tackle the 2000 Exams, when you do, take the
    >> upgrade exams for 2003. You may want to take 2003 exams individually
    >> but be

    > careful
    >> with the 294 Exam---VERY DIFFICULT to pass.

    >
    > Gimme a break. NOTHING on ANY Microsoft exam is calculus...
    >
    >
    >
    >


    well maybe he got stummped with the subnetting. i can see it being
    difficult for someone new. wait until buddy attempts a CCNP. he he

    --
    Rowdy Yates, MCNGP #39
    http://rowdy_yates2.tripod.com/
    http://profiles.yahoo.com/rowdy_yates_mcngp
     
    Rowdy Yates, Aug 28, 2004
    #16
  17. Jason P. Russell

    Cory Cote Guest

    Yes, I have been an MCSE trainer for 5 years now. I believe that if you
    take an MCSE 2k would be more of an asset to you. Getting training in an
    older version to me has always been more rewarding then new versions. It is
    much easier to learn 2k3 if you have knowledge and experience with 2k.

    Cory M. Cote, MCT, MCSE, MCSA, CNA, CNE, A+, N+, Server+


    "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    > Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice on.
    > Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I normally
    > work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    training.
    > The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    send
    > me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that the
    > school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    Cisco's
    > CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    > taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    > 2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any advice
    > you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    and
    > email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    >
    > Jason P. Russell
    >
    >
    >
     
    Cory Cote, Oct 20, 2004
    #17
  18. Jason P. Russell

    Rowdy Yates Guest

    Yes. Older versions is good. Look for MS Wondows 2.0 training - thats
    the best!

    if you have trouble, go to

    http://www.olderversions.com

    RY



    Cory Cote wrote:
    > Yes, I have been an MCSE trainer for 5 years now. I believe that if you
    > take an MCSE 2k would be more of an asset to you. Getting training in an
    > older version to me has always been more rewarding then new versions. It is
    > much easier to learn 2k3 if you have knowledge and experience with 2k.
    >
    > Cory M. Cote, MCT, MCSE, MCSA, CNA, CNE, A+, N+, Server+
    >
    >
    > "Jason P. Russell" <> wrote in message
    > news:NXLpc.31029$bS1.20477@okepread02...
    >
    >>Hello all, I have a question that I hope you can give me some advice on.
    >>Here is the situation: I am on active duty in the US Navy and I normally
    >>work in a network administrator role even though I have no formal

    >
    > training.
    >
    >>The Navy, in there infinite wisdom, finally (after 5 years!) decided to

    >
    > send
    >
    >>me to a 2 month long network administrator school. The kicker is that the
    >>school uses curriculum for Microsoft 2000 version products and also

    >
    > Cisco's
    >
    >>CCNA curriculum. Here is the question, should I start studying for and
    >>taking Microsoft's MCSE 2000 exams and then take the tests to upgrade to
    >>2003, or should I just study for and take the MCSE 2003 exams. Any advice
    >>you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please respond in the forum

    >
    > and
    >
    >>email me as I don't check newsgroups as much as I should.
    >>
    >>Jason P. Russell
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    >



    --
    Rowdy Yates, MCNGP #39
    http://www.mcngp.com/
    "Do you smell that? I think is't Albanian Goat Smegma! Who wants some?"
     
    Rowdy Yates, Oct 20, 2004
    #18
    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. Nico
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    608
    Gio Sim
    Aug 25, 2003
  2. =?Utf-8?B?R2FuaQ==?=

    MSCA -2000 to MCSA 2003 and MCSE 2003

    =?Utf-8?B?R2FuaQ==?=, Sep 15, 2006, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,644
    Vancouver
    Sep 16, 2006
  3. =?Utf-8?B?bG9sbw==?=
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    804
    Kline Sphere
    Feb 22, 2007
  4. acem77
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    3,486
    dibdib
    Apr 3, 2008
  5. ffoeg
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    768
    ffoeg
    Jun 29, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page