Everthing in IT is not vendor based. Just off the top of my head A+ Certification SANS GIAC CISSP
These are all certifications that are not based on any vendor's products. Dennis Depp -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 2:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Shortcuts to Outlook objects This is exactly what I am talking about. Certifications in our industry are based around vendors and their tools. I get "Microsoft certified". But that is meaningless. Imagine the corollary, a doctor gets certified in "The Purple Pill". That's nonsense, but that is how the IT industry works. We get certifications based upon vendors, not based upon the services or processes we provide or our specialties. If we were to operate more like a profession, we would have people getting certified in "Email" and "Network OS", etc. But we do not, everything in IT is vendor-based. It is sad and until our industry wakes up and realizes this, it will fail to be viewed a profession on par with doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. This view has a SEVERE impact on our ENTIRE industry. We are the equivalent of people traveling around in our "medicine" wagon peddling snake oil and other remedies to cure all your ills. > I agree with you, to an extent. However, I believe the accountability > = lapse in our profession is because of the paucity of meaningful = > credentials. An attorney has to pass the bar, and then (potentially) > = get board-certified in his or her specialty. Same with medical > doctors. = Same with psychologists. Aside from the CCIE program and > very few = others, the certification process in our industry is > ludicrous and = meaningless. As long as "built a Quake server in my > parents' garage" is = considered a credential, and as long as a paper > MCSE or CNE are = considered credentials, the problem will exist. The > other problem that = goes hand-in-hand with this is that hiring > authorities for some reason = believe that they can accurately judge > an applicant's qualifications = based upon buzzword bingo, meaningless > certs papering the wall, and = "years of experience." Then they get > some monkey that crammed for a = week to get his MCSE, throws around a > bunch of lingo that he read in a = tech journal in the waiting room, > and shared breathing space with a = broken installation of $technology > for x period of time. =20 > > I don't believe accepting my Microsoft Bob coffee mug perverts my = > objectivity. Except that I really like drinking coffee from it and = > probably wouldn't use my Novell mugs because they're plastic and > shaped = in such a way that my coffee gets cold. > > -tom > > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Posted At: Friday, February 07, 2003 12:30 PM > Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List > Conversation: Shortcuts to Outlook objects > Subject: RE: Shortcuts to Outlook objects > > > I'm not sure how this refutes anything along these lines. > > Going to a trade show and picking up a freebie is one thing. Accepting > a title and accepting continued compensation is quite another. There > is no relationship implied with the first, there is with the second. > > There are very specific things that denote a profession. One is having > = an independent governing body that defines and enforces the "rules" > and ethics of the profession. The IT industry is a horrible failure in > this regard. And, if you want to get specific, the only real > professions that meet all of the definitions are military, medical, > lawyers and to a = lesser > degree accounting and engineering. If you want to get technical, the > military is the only profession that truly meets all of the = > requirements. > In terms of their management of individuals in their profession, they = > are > answerable to no one, have their own legal and ethical code of conduct = > and > enforce those rules. This is why there is the justice system and the > military's justice system. > > We work with lawyers all the time. We even host partner companies on > our Exchange server for free. The lawyers that we work with FORCE us > to bill them because they cannot ethically accept this service for > free. It creates a conflict of interest for them. Our IT partners have > no such ethical constraints. > > Go talk to lawyers, doctors and architects. Talk to them about their > governing bodies, their ethics, etc. Talk to them about vendors in > their industry. Getting things for free is viewed as bribery and a > conflict of interest. Some of these industries are more lax than > others. Look at the medical industry and how drug reps are viewed > treated. Then compare that with IT's views on vendors. The difference > is stark. In one, drug reps giving away free samples is seen as a huge > problem, in IT it is not. _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
