What is Microsoft's Policy on Transcenders?

Discussion in 'MCSD' started by Chris Kennedy, Sep 15, 2003.

  1. I can't find anything on Microsoft's site but don't want to use them if are
    officially considered cheating.
     
    Chris Kennedy, Sep 15, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chris Kennedy

    Maria Guest

    Remember that absence of proof is not proof of absence.
    Don't be a victim of FUD...

    >-----Original Message-----
    >I can't find anything on Microsoft's site but don't want

    to use them if are
    >officially considered cheating.
    >
    >
    >.
    >
     
    Maria, Sep 15, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. What's FUD - I won't take offence if the F stands for something unsavoury!
    And what does 'proof of absence mean'?

    "Maria" <> wrote in message
    news:07f501c37b87$667a7a50$...
    | Remember that absence of proof is not proof of absence.
    | Don't be a victim of FUD...
    |
    | >-----Original Message-----
    | >I can't find anything on Microsoft's site but don't want
    | to use them if are
    | >officially considered cheating.
    | >
    | >
    | >.
    | >
     
    Chris Kennedy, Sep 15, 2003
    #3
  4. MS would have shut them down long ago if they were cheating... They are not
    cheating. Brain dumps are cheating. They're also advertised in MS's MCP
    Certification magazine.

    They [Transcender] have chosen not to participate in MS's certified exam
    prep program or whatever it's called. Sort of like you not getting your MCSD
    ;-) ...

    --
    Leigh Kendall, MCSD, MCDBA

    "Chris Kennedy" <> wrote in message
    news:eu$...
    > I can't find anything on Microsoft's site but don't want to use them if

    are
    > officially considered cheating.
    >
    >
     
    Leigh Kendall, Sep 15, 2003
    #4
  5. Chris Kennedy

    Maria Guest

    >What's FUD - I won't take offence if the F stands for
    something unsavoury!
    >And what does 'proof of absence mean'?
    >


    The F does stand for a four-letter word, but it's quite
    clean... FUD is an old marketing ploy, and it stands for
    Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. IBM used to be very good at
    it.

    Your first post suggested to me that you thought Microsoft
    disapproves of using Transcender practice tests.

    But even though you did not find evidence that Microsoft
    approves of Transcender, this does not really 'prove' that
    Microsoft disapproves of Transcender.

    Or, in general: if you cannot prove that something is
    true, you have not actually proved that it is false.
    (Even if it were possible to prove a negative in the first
    place).

    And if I have now managed to muddle things up even more,
    then I apologise ;o)

    Maria
     
    Maria, Sep 15, 2003
    #5
  6. I bet you're really good at things like logic gates in electronics.


    "Maria" <> wrote in message
    news:026901c37bb3$03ba4f90$...
    | >What's FUD - I won't take offence if the F stands for
    | something unsavoury!
    | >And what does 'proof of absence mean'?
    | >
    |
    | The F does stand for a four-letter word, but it's quite
    | clean... FUD is an old marketing ploy, and it stands for
    | Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. IBM used to be very good at
    | it.
    |
    | Your first post suggested to me that you thought Microsoft
    | disapproves of using Transcender practice tests.
    |
    | But even though you did not find evidence that Microsoft
    | approves of Transcender, this does not really 'prove' that
    | Microsoft disapproves of Transcender.
    |
    | Or, in general: if you cannot prove that something is
    | true, you have not actually proved that it is false.
    | (Even if it were possible to prove a negative in the first
    | place).
    |
    | And if I have now managed to muddle things up even more,
    | then I apologise ;o)
    |
    | Maria
    |
    |
     
    Chris Kennedy, Sep 16, 2003
    #6
  7. Chris Kennedy

    Kline Sphere Guest

    >I bet you're really good at things like logic gates in electronics.

    Ummm... and/or while, maybe not!
     
    Kline Sphere, Sep 16, 2003
    #7
  8. Chris Kennedy

    Maria Guest

    >I bet you're really good at things like logic gates in
    electronics.

    No, I am not in electronics. I have fond memories though
    of writing firmware (FORTH o/s on 6809 and 68000, and
    serial comms). Logic gates and PLCs are quite beyond me ;o)

    Maria
     
    Maria, Sep 16, 2003
    #8
  9. Chris Kennedy

    Kline Sphere Guest

    >FORTH

    Aghhhhh!!! A true write once, read never again language. I thought
    astronomers were the only people to ever have used forth!
     
    Kline Sphere, Sep 16, 2003
    #9
  10. Chris Kennedy

    Maria Guest

    >Aghhhhh!!! A true write once, read never again language.

    Having come across an ancient printout (fanfold paper, no
    less) of one of my masterpieces, I'm afraid I have to
    agree with you.

    >I thought astronomers were the only people to ever have

    used forth!

    Forth originated with astronomers who used it in early
    satellites, but it is useful in any system with very
    little memory. I used it years ago for automotive work and
    once enhanced a pharmaceutical production-line controller.
    I believe some white-goods appliances also use(d) it. Do
    you know of another language that has a command-line
    interpreter of 2KB, and a complete kernel in 8KB?
    Interactive debugging comes as standard, multitasking and -
    threading are the norm. There are even chips with Forth as
    the assembly language, I'm not making this up!
    www.fig-org.uk

    Maria
     
    Maria, Sep 16, 2003
    #10
  11. Chris Kennedy

    Kline Sphere Guest

    Very interesting.

    Way back my company looked at using forth to solve curtain types of
    problems. The concept of a dictionary to add your own words and
    sentences, thus creating your own language, seemed [at the time] a
    naturally way to describe the problem and solution as one. After that
    they toyed with prolog, with the same goals in mind. Fortunately
    object oriented practices began to take shape and become more wide
    spread.

    On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:29:45 -0700, "Maria"
    <> wrote:

    >>Aghhhhh!!! A true write once, read never again language.

    >
    >Having come across an ancient printout (fanfold paper, no
    >less) of one of my masterpieces, I'm afraid I have to
    >agree with you.
    >
    >>I thought astronomers were the only people to ever have

    >used forth!
    >
    >Forth originated with astronomers who used it in early
    >satellites, but it is useful in any system with very
    >little memory. I used it years ago for automotive work and
    >once enhanced a pharmaceutical production-line controller.
    >I believe some white-goods appliances also use(d) it. Do
    >you know of another language that has a command-line
    >interpreter of 2KB, and a complete kernel in 8KB?
    >Interactive debugging comes as standard, multitasking and -
    >threading are the norm. There are even chips with Forth as
    >the assembly language, I'm not making this up!
    >www.fig-org.uk
    >
    >Maria
     
    Kline Sphere, Sep 16, 2003
    #11
  12. Chris Kennedy

    Sarang Guest

    Frankely speaking,

    don't even think of looking at either (transcender or
    dumps) because, thought you might just pass the exams,
    you will miss out on that personal satisfaction of
    passing the exam after taking some amount of effort.

    I cleared my MCSD.NET and am on the topof the world
    today. Right amount of study always does pay off well.

    Also, I believe that nowadays to clear MS exams all you
    need is a little common sense and to know the fact that
    these exams are becoming more of promotional instruments
    for their latest products. :(
     
    Sarang, Sep 17, 2003
    #12
  13. Not sure what you're trying to say.

    Are you trying to say that by using Transcender or some other legitimate
    prep tool as preparation after studying the product and working with it
    hands-on day to day, is somehow less effort than NOT using a prep tool like
    Transcender?

    If so, I'd have to say I don't agree with you. Try telling that to Kaplan
    and other organizations out there helping people pass the SAT's and other
    standardized exams, let alone IT certifications.

    If ALL you use is Transcender, than yes, you're short changing yourself.
    BUT, if it's used as a final prep tool (the way it's designed to be used),
    after proper study and hands-on experience in a real work environment, then
    that's smart. But again, it's up to the individual and how much money they
    feel justified in spending to prepare for an exam. But, to say that using
    them is somehow degrading the satisfaction of passing the exam, then that's
    just plain silly.

    --
    Leigh Kendall, MCSD, MCDBA

    "Sarang" <> wrote in message
    news:04c101c37d49$1228bc50$...
    > Frankely speaking,
    >
    > don't even think of looking at either (transcender or
    > dumps) because, thought you might just pass the exams,
    > you will miss out on that personal satisfaction of
    > passing the exam after taking some amount of effort.
    >
    > I cleared my MCSD.NET and am on the topof the world
    > today. Right amount of study always does pay off well.
    >
    > Also, I believe that nowadays to clear MS exams all you
    > need is a little common sense and to know the fact that
    > these exams are becoming more of promotional instruments
    > for their latest products. :(
     
    Leigh Kendall, Sep 17, 2003
    #13
  14. Chris Kennedy

    Kline Sphere Guest

    Oh come on....

    Most people use these type of 'prep tools' in the hope that the same
    (or very similar) questions will appear in the actual exam. Why else
    would anyone want to use them? The format of these exams is so simple,
    that no intelligent person would need to take a 'practice' test before
    taking the real one.

    My view is they help to undermine the worth of the exams, when in
    order for some dummy to pass an exam, that dummy simply needs to pay
    transcender (or whoever) for a set of questions and answers which they
    can memorize.

    On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:27:37 -0400, "Leigh Kendall"
    <> wrote:

    >Not sure what you're trying to say.
    >
    >Are you trying to say that by using Transcender or some other legitimate
    >prep tool as preparation after studying the product and working with it
    >hands-on day to day, is somehow less effort than NOT using a prep tool like
    >Transcender?
    >
    >If so, I'd have to say I don't agree with you. Try telling that to Kaplan
    >and other organizations out there helping people pass the SAT's and other
    >standardized exams, let alone IT certifications.
    >
    >If ALL you use is Transcender, than yes, you're short changing yourself.
    >BUT, if it's used as a final prep tool (the way it's designed to be used),
    >after proper study and hands-on experience in a real work environment, then
    >that's smart. But again, it's up to the individual and how much money they
    >feel justified in spending to prepare for an exam. But, to say that using
    >them is somehow degrading the satisfaction of passing the exam, then that's
    >just plain silly.
     
    Kline Sphere, Sep 17, 2003
    #14
  15. Microsoft supports the use of 'prep tools' for exam preparation. This is why
    they have the MCPTP program.

    "Kline Sphere" <T> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Oh come on....
    >
    > Most people use these type of 'prep tools' in the hope that the same
    > (or very similar) questions will appear in the actual exam. Why else
    > would anyone want to use them? The format of these exams is so simple,
    > that no intelligent person would need to take a 'practice' test before
    > taking the real one.
    >
    > My view is they help to undermine the worth of the exams, when in
    > order for some dummy to pass an exam, that dummy simply needs to pay
    > transcender (or whoever) for a set of questions and answers which they
    > can memorize.
    >
    > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:27:37 -0400, "Leigh Kendall"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Not sure what you're trying to say.
    > >
    > >Are you trying to say that by using Transcender or some other legitimate
    > >prep tool as preparation after studying the product and working with it
    > >hands-on day to day, is somehow less effort than NOT using a prep tool

    like
    > >Transcender?
    > >
    > >If so, I'd have to say I don't agree with you. Try telling that to Kaplan
    > >and other organizations out there helping people pass the SAT's and other
    > >standardized exams, let alone IT certifications.
    > >
    > >If ALL you use is Transcender, than yes, you're short changing yourself.
    > >BUT, if it's used as a final prep tool (the way it's designed to be

    used),
    > >after proper study and hands-on experience in a real work environment,

    then
    > >that's smart. But again, it's up to the individual and how much money

    they
    > >feel justified in spending to prepare for an exam. But, to say that using
    > >them is somehow degrading the satisfaction of passing the exam, then

    that's
    > >just plain silly.

    >
     
    Davin Mickelson, Sep 17, 2003
    #15
  16. Chris Kennedy

    Kline Sphere Guest

    >Microsoft supports the use of 'prep tools' for exam preparation. This is why
    >they have the MCPTP program.


    Absolutely. As I implied, it's great way to get more and more people
    through the door, although there is no guarantee that someone who
    passes the exam understands the subject matter.
     
    Kline Sphere, Sep 17, 2003
    #16
  17. The more people taking exams, the greater the revenue stream.

    What a narrow wall for the MS Cert team to stand on. Encourage as many
    people as possible to get certified (purchase exams) and yet protect the
    certifications (to a certain extent) so that they maintain some validity -
    or it all comes crashing down, where no one will get certified because it
    will mean nothing.


    "Kline Sphere" <T> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >Microsoft supports the use of 'prep tools' for exam preparation. This is

    why
    > >they have the MCPTP program.

    >
    > Absolutely. As I implied, it's great way to get more and more people
    > through the door, although there is no guarantee that someone who
    > passes the exam understands the subject matter.
     
    Davin Mickelson, Sep 17, 2003
    #17
  18. Chris Kennedy

    Kline Sphere Guest

    Interesting point.

    On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:37:12 -0500, "Davin Mickelson"
    <> wrote:

    >The more people taking exams, the greater the revenue stream.
    >
    >What a narrow wall for the MS Cert team to stand on. Encourage as many
    >people as possible to get certified (purchase exams) and yet protect the
    >certifications (to a certain extent) so that they maintain some validity -
    >or it all comes crashing down, where no one will get certified because it
    >will mean nothing.
    >
    >
    >"Kline Sphere" <T> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> >Microsoft supports the use of 'prep tools' for exam preparation. This is

    >why
    >> >they have the MCPTP program.

    >>
    >> Absolutely. As I implied, it's great way to get more and more people
    >> through the door, although there is no guarantee that someone who
    >> passes the exam understands the subject matter.

    >
     
    Kline Sphere, Sep 17, 2003
    #18
  19. I can't say I totally disagree. I know that there are plenty of people
    looking to just pass the exam without cutting their teeth. They turn to
    whatever method they think will get them there the quickest. Of course, the
    cert alone won't help much in getting real results if they don't truly have
    the knowledge and/or experience to back it up.

    I personally use the Transcenders as a final prep before the exam. I do
    however, keep a daily diet of study/reading; books, magazines etc in
    addition to daily work. But by no means do I look to them [Transcenders] for
    the "answers". I think that they're a good way to get into the exam
    mentality before an exam and point out possible weaknesses to focus on.

    But yes, to reiterate, I realize that some people use them (and others) as a
    shortcut to strictly try and pass them exam without the real effort
    involved. I suppose for some, it works. Obviously though, there are plenty
    of posts here, where people have used study aides such as Transcender, and
    have still failed.


    "Kline Sphere" <T> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Oh come on....
    >
    > Most people use these type of 'prep tools' in the hope that the same
    > (or very similar) questions will appear in the actual exam. Why else
    > would anyone want to use them? The format of these exams is so simple,
    > that no intelligent person would need to take a 'practice' test before
    > taking the real one.
    >
    > My view is they help to undermine the worth of the exams, when in
    > order for some dummy to pass an exam, that dummy simply needs to pay
    > transcender (or whoever) for a set of questions and answers which they
    > can memorize.
    >
    > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:27:37 -0400, "Leigh Kendall"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Not sure what you're trying to say.
    > >
    > >Are you trying to say that by using Transcender or some other legitimate
    > >prep tool as preparation after studying the product and working with it
    > >hands-on day to day, is somehow less effort than NOT using a prep tool

    like
    > >Transcender?
    > >
    > >If so, I'd have to say I don't agree with you. Try telling that to Kaplan
    > >and other organizations out there helping people pass the SAT's and other
    > >standardized exams, let alone IT certifications.
    > >
    > >If ALL you use is Transcender, than yes, you're short changing yourself.
    > >BUT, if it's used as a final prep tool (the way it's designed to be

    used),
    > >after proper study and hands-on experience in a real work environment,

    then
    > >that's smart. But again, it's up to the individual and how much money

    they
    > >feel justified in spending to prepare for an exam. But, to say that using
    > >them is somehow degrading the satisfaction of passing the exam, then

    that's
    > >just plain silly.

    >
     
    Leigh Kendall, Sep 17, 2003
    #19
  20. Chris Kennedy

    Jim Parker Guest

    Give me a break!
    People buy Transcenders exams and use them as the PRIMARY study material to
    pass the exam.
    Somebody with no knowledge of the material at all can buy a Transcender
    exam, study the exam and a few of the links provided, and pass the exam a
    week or two after buying the Transcenders.

    That is not learning anything useful in the real world, it is learning to
    pass the exam. That is the value of Transcenders exams, to learn to pass
    the exam. It is only that value.
    If you read books, work with the product, take the exam and pass, then you
    know the product and deserve the certification. Most people who use
    Transcenders exams skip the 'read the books' and 'work with the product'
    part and still pass the exam. They do not deserve the certification.
    You can't tell me that most people are paying $169 for each Transcender
    practice exam and using them only as a "final prep" to ensure they know the
    material. People pay $169 because they know that is the only thing they
    need to buy to pass the exam.

    JD.


    "Leigh Kendall" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Not sure what you're trying to say.
    >
    > Are you trying to say that by using Transcender or some other legitimate
    > prep tool as preparation after studying the product and working with it
    > hands-on day to day, is somehow less effort than NOT using a prep tool

    like
    > Transcender?
    >
    > If so, I'd have to say I don't agree with you. Try telling that to Kaplan
    > and other organizations out there helping people pass the SAT's and other
    > standardized exams, let alone IT certifications.
    >
    > If ALL you use is Transcender, than yes, you're short changing yourself.
    > BUT, if it's used as a final prep tool (the way it's designed to be used),
    > after proper study and hands-on experience in a real work environment,

    then
    > that's smart. But again, it's up to the individual and how much money they
    > feel justified in spending to prepare for an exam. But, to say that using
    > them is somehow degrading the satisfaction of passing the exam, then

    that's
    > just plain silly.
    >
    > --
    > Leigh Kendall, MCSD, MCDBA
    >
    > "Sarang" <> wrote in message
    > news:04c101c37d49$1228bc50$...
    > > Frankely speaking,
    > >
    > > don't even think of looking at either (transcender or
    > > dumps) because, thought you might just pass the exams,
    > > you will miss out on that personal satisfaction of
    > > passing the exam after taking some amount of effort.
    > >
    > > I cleared my MCSD.NET and am on the topof the world
    > > today. Right amount of study always does pay off well.
    > >
    > > Also, I believe that nowadays to clear MS exams all you
    > > need is a little common sense and to know the fact that
    > > these exams are becoming more of promotional instruments
    > > for their latest products. :(

    >
     
    Jim Parker, Sep 18, 2003
    #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. James Edwards

    70-316. (C# Web-Apps) & Transcenders

    James Edwards, Sep 14, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    562
    James Edwards
    Sep 14, 2004
  2. c00per11

    Re: MCSE 2003 MCSD .NET transcenders

    c00per11, Dec 30, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    496
    certifications
    Dec 31, 2004
  3. Tyler Cobb
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    18,754
    Tyler Cobb
    Oct 19, 2005
  4. Tyler Cobb
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    768
    dawnad
    Oct 9, 2005
  5. Geoffrey Sinclair

    Policy map using policy map

    Geoffrey Sinclair, Jul 27, 2009, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    595
    bod43
    Jul 27, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page