Just some comments about the opinions of some contributors in this discussion.
I sometimes see arrogance of CCIE being "Know-It-All about networking both theoretically and experiences". I see most people try to compare apples to oranges when talking about CCIE. Some people have a solid networking work experience, while still not being able to pass CCIE. While others manage to pass CCIE with less networking experience as the previous guy. Well CCIE Lab and the real world experience are different things. It is like comparing a top-notch businessman and a graduate who just finished his MBA. Maybe the businessman does not need any certification at all to make money, because of his experience. But it does not mean that a fresh graduate who just finishes his MBA only having 3-year working experience can be claimed he is a "book-rat" MBA degree. This sentence means demoralizing people who will accomplish CCIE and go further in their real-world experience to understand and learn more about their certification values. That's why Cisco has 2-year recertification program for CCIE. Having CCIE is just the beginning of exploring and understanding more about the real networking world. It does not matter how you get to manage to pass the lab, as long as it is not cheating, we have to appreciate and respect all those people who dedicate their whole time pursuing CCIE, and respect them when they get it. In future, we might not know that these people will have more experience than the people who claim them "lab-rats". The most important thing is to eventually balance both the theoretical, lab and real experience. For those who think themselves very well-experienced, and always try to demoralized people who get CCIE as lab-rat, be careful in the near future you might lose out to them. People need not be so proud of themselves just because of CCIE. ""nrf"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > ""Michael L. Williams"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > It's not in Cisco's best interest to crank out CCIEs and I doubt that's > what > > they're doing (or going to do).... After all, this is a job posting, and > I > > doubt they're going to hire and train enough people to make an impact in > the > > total number of CCIEs out there. (i.e. they may hire 5, 10, hell maybe > even > > 50 people, say, and so you're only taking 5/10/50 more CCIEs on top of the > > 7400 existing CCIEs ... not enough to impact the overall market/demand for > > CCIEs, IMHO). I agree with another poster here that, even spending > everyday > > at "work" for Cisco studying isn't enough to get through the new CCIE > > written, much less the lab. > > I agree with the premise that even TAC guys do not get as much hands-on as > they would like, especially with expensive gear. From my friends who are > and were at TAC, they have to fight for access to good equipment. > > > > > As far as the devaluing of the CCIE, I've see ramblings of this ever since > I > > joined Groupstudy, and I believe that it's mostly just alot of talk. > Sure, > > CCIEs aren't pulling in as high a salary as they were 2 years ago, but > most > > of that is due to the dot-bomb thing coming to an end as well as the job > > market/economy of the last year or so. Two things can devalue the cert: > > The number of CCIEs skyrocketing and/or people being able to attain the > CCIE > > without being qualified. I don't think anyone will argue that the CCIE > > written/lab combo pretty much keeps "paper CCIEs" from becoming a reality. > > Bullshi*. There are a significant number of guys lately who've passed the > lab who I wouldn't hesitate to call "paper" (heck, even they have honestly > referred to themselves as paper, usually after getting a few drinks into > them). > > But I do agree with the premise that the main reason for the devaluing of > the cert is the bad economy, and the lab-rats are a lesser consideration > (still important, but lesser). But on the other hand, I think it is the > case that the CCIE will probably never attain the status that it once did, > simply because the we will probably never see another huge network buildout > orgy like the dotcom boom again in our lifetime. So while I believe the > networking industry will get better, people who thinks it's going to get > back to, say, 1999, are just deluding themselves. > > > As far as the number of CCIEs skyrocketing, if I recall correctly, when I > > first started working on Cisco certification there were around 6000 CCIEs. > > Now there are around 7400 (worldwide). That's certainly not > "skyrocketing". > > Compare that to MSCEs where there was such a flood of new MSCEs on the > > market that simply supply/demand took over, and all of a sudden MSCEs were > a > > dime a dozen (no offense to people with MSCEs, just making a point about > the > > numbers). > > > > Also, I don't agree with the claim that the CCIEs best days are behind it. > > I believe this is definitely true - look at the salaries of CCIE's back in > '99 compared to today. Obviously the main reason for this is the bad > economy. But the proliferation of CCIE's (especially lab rats) doesn't help > matters. Just ask Jon Kaberna who's written quite a bit on this subject. > Again, the main reason is that I doubt the networking economy will ever get > back to what it was during the boom ever again in our lifetime. > > > Although many felt that the new one-day lab was going to open the > floodgates > > for "paper CCIEs", I don't recall reading any posts by people saying the > new > > lab was a breeze. Also, any of the level of difficulty that may have been > > lost going to the one-day format is definitely going to be made up for by > > the new format of the written. As has been posted here more recently (by > > either Bernard or Dennis right after they took the beta), the failure rate > > of the written is definitely going to go up with this new exam. > > If that is true, then it is a long-overdue change. The fact is the old > written was not getting the job done. I think not only should the new > written be more difficult, but you should also only be able to attempt it a > certain number of times per year (say, 3 times per year or something). > Also, Cisco should emphatically state once-and-for-all that the > CCIE-written is not a cert. > > > > > Just my 2 cents.... > > > > Mike W. > > > > "nwo" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > If this is true then it represents an even worse devaluation of the CCIE > > > than what has happened already. Not only will there be those lab-rat > > CCIE's > > > out there with zero experience that are being churned out already, but > now > > > Cisco itself will be pumping out CCIE's with as little as 3 months > > > experience. This is even more evidence that the cert's best days are > > > behind it. > > > > > > ""Johnzaggat"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > Join Cisco and get CCIE in 3-6 months. Must be a typo. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/pcgi-bin/jobs/JobAgent?rm=jobdetail&req_id=703608&keywo > > > > rds=+ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44321&t=43306 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
