Your point about ratios : agreed, which is why I made another post, where I tried to account for the legacy factor of Cisco gear. Once again, Cisco loses, even with extreme assumptions that favor Cisco. Please see my other post. The point is that a ratio of 380:1 is extremely difficult to wipe out, no matter what assumptions you use. So you say I should not use the annual run rates between the 2 companies, and that is reasonable. So instead I presume there is $330 billion of Cisco gear sitting around out there in the world, because it has been 15 years since Cisco's IPO times $22 billion of gear per year. This is clearly ridiculous because obviously Cisco has not sold $22 billion of gear every year since its IPO, and also because almost all of Cisco's gear that is more than a few years has been junked. But, fine we'll make that assumption. So then the ratio should be 330:1. What's the real ratio? 380:1
About your drumming on skills versus certs. You are correct, I have already conceded so. Of course it is true that experience and skills matter more than a cert. It is just much easier for me to type CCIE or JNCIE rather than "skills and experience that are generally held by the average CCIE or JNCIE" (also because this whole discussion was launched from guys talking about the MCSE vs. the CCIE, so I had to respond in kind) But , Okay fine. If it makes you feel any better, go back to all my posts on this thread and make that substitution every time I say CCIE or JNCIE. So basically, now what I am saying in all my posts is that I believe that a certain level of skill and experience in Juniper is probably more valuable than an equivalent level of skill and experience in Cisco. How about that? Now, about your point that it is unreasonable that regular people should go for Juniper due to lack of access, of course you are correct. I am not saying that people should just drop everything and go for Juniper if they do not have proper access. What I am saying is that if you are given a choice to study one or the other, and you have access to both. I believe it is better for you to go for Juniper. Furthermore, I believe that even if you don't have access to a Juniper lab right now, but you see the opportunity to make moves in your career such that you will have such access, then that is something you should consider. Besides, I believe people should be proactive and aggressive when it comes to their career. Your company and your boss doesn't really care whether your skills are staying current (they may say that they care, but they probably don't really care), they just want to get things done, and if that means sticking you with learning skills for which there is little demand elsewhere, they don't really care about that. You don't want to get stuck maintaining Windows 3.11 while everybody else in your company is learning W2K, for example. It is really the responsibility of every IT individual to make sure that their skills remain up-to-date and valuable, and you can't always be passive and just learn whatever technologies your company decides to throw at you. sometimes you have to aggressively make moves with your career to make sure you are learning skills that are in demand. You don't want to be always stuck maintaining Dec-VAX boxes and Vines networks and Bay routers and then discover that when you get laid off, nobody wants to hire you because your skills are obsolete. You've got to remember - this whole thread started because I was responding to somebody who was proposing that the MCSE was more valuable than the CCIE,and his reasons for saying so were that there are more Microsoft jobs than Cisco jobs out there. My response (this whole thread) was that just because there is more demand for a certain skill does not mean that that skills is necessarily more valuable, because you also need to look at the supply side of the equation, and I was using Juniper and the JNCIE as the counterargument (as an example of a skills with low demand and even lower supply). The thread then digressed as people were shocked, shocked that I would dare to question the orthodoxy that Cisco is great and Juniper is nothing. I was not proposing that everybody junk their Cisco lab and run to study Juniper, not at all. Scarcity was not a concern for this thread. Why not? Well, the guy who made the MCSE vs. CCIE argument wasn't invoking scarcity either, even though it is clearly easier and cheaper to set up an MCSE lab than a CCIE lab. He was just talking about which skills was more valuable (Microsoft or Cisco), without getting into any discussions of scarcity of equipment. So if he wasn't going to invoke equipment scarcity in his argument, then why should I invoke it in my response? By the same token, this is the same reason why I only talked about certs, not skills. Once again, I will say that of course you are correct that skills matters more than certs. But on the other hand, this thread started because somebody was implying that the MCSE was better than the CCIE. He was talking certs only. So, fine, I decided to fight him on his own terms. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Baker, Jason" To: "nrf" ; Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 9:47 PM Subject: RE: Is the CCIE really worth it??? [7:3485] > you are quoting ratios again and you have not gone completely against > juniper. Take example > below. > > how about quoting ratios of all cisco equipment out there to total CCIE's > and then take all Juniper equipment out in market place as opposed to > juniper certifed people. > I think you will find that to be extremely in favor of cisco. > > Also Juniper equipment is in service provider field. How many people get to > touch it ? Not many. > And those that do i am gathering are probably not certified in juniper > anyway. > > So if you are not using it, going on what you say you need hands on to get > cert, why is it worth > studying it, as the equipment is not in the persoanl lab market. > > So if you understand the technology regarless of cert and are good at what > you do, then you will > most likely get to use it. Therefore salary is not compleltely based on your > certification but > on what you know and can produce. > > so back to my initial argument being certified in juniper does not get you > your salary > > > Your point about ratios : agreed, which is why I made another post, where I tried to account for the legacy factor of Cisco gear. Once again, Cisco loses, even with extreme assumptions that favor Cisco. Please see my other post. The point is that a ratio of 380:1 is extremely difficult to wipe out, no matter what assumptions you use. So you say I should not use the annual run rates between the 2 companies, and that is reasonable. So instead I presume there is $330 billion of Cisco gear sitting around out there in the world, because it has been 15 years since Cisco's IPO times $22 billion of gear per year. This is clearly ridiculous because obviously Cisco has not sold $22 billion of gear every year since its IPO, and also because almost all of Cisco's gear that is more than a few years has been junked. But, fine we'll make that assumption. So then the ratio should be 330:1. What's the real ratio? 380:1 About your drumming on skills versus certs. You are correct, I have already conceded so. Of course it is true that experience and skills matter more than a cert. It is just much easier for me to type CCIE or JNCIE rather than "skills and experience that are generally held by the average CCIE or JNCIE" (also because this whole discussion was launched from guys talking about the MCSE vs. the CCIE, so I had to respond in kind) But , Okay fine. If it makes you feel any better, go back to all my posts on this thread and make that substitution every time I say CCIE or JNCIE. So basically, now what I am saying in all my posts is that I believe that a certain level of skill and experience in Juniper is more valuable than an equivalent level of skill and experience in Cisco. How about that? Now, about your point that it is unreasonable that regular people should go for Juniper due to lack of access, of course you are correct. I am not saying that people should just drop everything and go for Juniper if they do not have proper access. What I am saying is that if you are given a choice to study one or the other, and you have access to both. I believe it is better for you to go for Juniper. Furthermore, I believe that even if you don't have access to a Juniper lab right now, but you see the opportunity to make moves in your career such that you will have such access, then that is something you should consider. You've got to remember - this whole thread started because I was responding to somebody who was proposing that the MCSE was more valuable than the CCIE, and his reasons for saying so were that there are more Microsoft jobs than Cisco jobs out there. My response (this whole thread) was that just because there is more demand for a certain skill does not mean that that skills is necessarily more valuable, because you also need to look at the supply side of the equation, and I was using Juniper and the JNCIE as the counterargument (as an example of a skills with low demand and even lower supply). I was not proposing that everybody junk their Cisco lab and run to study Juniper, not at all. Scarcity was not a concern for this thread. Why not? Well, the guy who made the MCSE vs. CCIE argument wasn't invoking scarcity either, even though it is clearly easier and cheaper to set up an MCSE lab than a CCIE lab. So if he wasn't going to invoke scarcity in his argument, then why should I invoke it in my response? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Baker, Jason" To: "nrf" ; Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 9:47 PM Subject: RE: Is the CCIE really worth it??? [7:3485] > you are quoting ratios again and you have not gone completely against > juniper. Take example > below. > > how about quoting ratios of all cisco equipment out there to total CCIE's > and then take all Juniper equipment out in market place as opposed to > juniper certifed people. > I think you will find that to be extremely in favor of cisco. > > Also Juniper equipment is in service provider field. How many people get to > touch it ? Not many. > And those that do i am gathering are probably not certified in juniper > anyway. > > So if you are not using it, going on what you say you need hands on to get > cert, why is it worth > studying it, as the equipment is not in the persoanl lab market. > > So if you understand the technology regarless of cert and are good at what > you do, then you will > most likely get to use it. Therefore salary is not compleltely based on your > certification but > on what you know and can produce. > > so back to my initial argument being certified in juniper does not get you > your salary > > > Your point about ratios : agreed, which is why I made another post, where I tried to account for the legacy factor of Cisco gear. Once again, Cisco loses, even with extreme assumptions that favor Cisco. Please see my other post. The point is that a ratio of 380:1 is extremely difficult to wipe out, no matter what assumptions you use. So you say I should not use the annual run rates between the 2 companies, and that is reasonable. So instead I presume there is $330 billion of Cisco gear sitting around out there in the world, because it has been 15 years since Cisco's IPO times $22 billion of gear per year. This is clearly ridiculous because obviously Cisco has not sold $22 billion of gear every year since its IPO, and also because almost all of Cisco's gear that is more than a few years has been junked. But, fine we'll make that assumption. So then the ratio should be 330:1. What's the real ratio? 380:1 About your drumming on skills versus certs. You are correct, I have already conceded so. Of course it is true that experience and skills matter more than a cert. It is just much easier for me to type CCIE or JNCIE rather than "skills and experience that are generally held by the average CCIE or JNCIE" (also because this whole discussion was launched from guys talking about the MCSE vs. the CCIE, so I had to respond in kind) But , Okay fine. If it makes you feel any better, go back to all my posts on this thread and make that substitution every time I say CCIE or JNCIE. So basically, now what I am saying in all my posts is that I believe that a certain level of skill and experience in Juniper is more valuable than an equivalent level of skill and experience in Cisco. How about that? Now, about your point that it is unreasonable that regular people should go for Juniper due to lack of access, of course you are correct. I am not saying that people should just drop everything and go for Juniper if they do not have proper access. What I am saying is that if you are given a choice to study one or the other, and you have access to both. I believe it is better for you to go for Juniper. Furthermore, I believe that even if you don't have access to a Juniper lab right now, but you see the opportunity to make moves in your career such that you will have such access, then that is something you should consider. You've got to remember - this whole thread started because I was responding to somebody who was proposing that the MCSE was more valuable than the CCIE, and his reasons for saying so were that there are more Microsoft jobs than Cisco jobs out there. My response (this whole thread) was that just because there is more demand for a certain skill does not mean that that skills is necessarily more valuable, because you also need to look at the supply side of the equation, and I was using Juniper and the JNCIE as the counterargument (as an example of a skills with low demand and even lower supply). I was not proposing that everybody junk their Cisco lab and run to study Juniper, not at all. Scarcity was not a concern for this thread. Why not? Well, the guy who made the MCSE vs. CCIE argument wasn't invoking scarcity either, even though it is clearly easier and cheaper to set up an MCSE lab than a CCIE lab. So if he wasn't going to invoke scarcity in his argument, then why should I invoke it in my response? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Baker, Jason" To: "nrf" ; Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 9:47 PM Subject: RE: Is the CCIE really worth it??? [7:3485] > you are quoting ratios again and you have not gone completely against > juniper. Take example > below. > > how about quoting ratios of all cisco equipment out there to total CCIE's > and then take all Juniper equipment out in market place as opposed to > juniper certifed people. > I think you will find that to be extremely in favor of cisco. > > Also Juniper equipment is in service provider field. How many people get to > touch it ? Not many. > And those that do i am gathering are probably not certified in juniper > anyway. > > So if you are not using it, going on what you say you need hands on to get > cert, why is it worth > studying it, as the equipment is not in the persoanl lab market. > > So if you understand the technology regarless of cert and are good at what > you do, then you will > most likely get to use it. Therefore salary is not compleltely based on your > certification but > on what you know and can produce. > > so back to my initial argument being certified in juniper does not get you > your salary Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=22099&t=3485 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
