Hi Folks,

Am 24.09.2016 um 23:04 schrieb [email protected]:
> So I think it should be a mixture like CCIE labs.
> Some practice should be in lab and some questions should be multiple choice 
> as now.
I disagree with this lab idea, as much as I would like it as a technician.
I think any lab testing would just run the pricing through the roof and make it 
hard to provide testing on smaller Linux events and fairs.
Not to mention getting a trainer and be tested at a local LUG. (Did my LPIC-1 
that way)
I understand that some people make a living by selling training and exams, but 
that should not eliminate the possibility to study yourself and take an 
inexpensive test on a Linux event.

> A good example is one of my first MS exams.
Bin there, done it, have a t-shirt about it.
Even so the t-shirt doesn't fit anymore.;-)

> They talk about routing and switching with MS servers. You only have to 
> deploy several network cards in your x86 server and then you could use it as 
> a router or switch.
> But this time, there was alredy much more bettet devices from cisco and other 
> supplier.
> So it would be a perfect standard and implements possibility of routing and 
> switching, but it was far away from business reality.....
> You see my point?
Not really.
Obviously MS was selling _their_ product, not Cisco or other suppliers.
Nevertheless, using a MS- or Novel-Server as a router/Switch in a SOHO 
environment was a common scenario in those times.
Even with the sophisticated Routers and switches around, routing and bridging 
is still a subject to Linux.

> We should have a look on our customer and have to ask what can we do, to 
> improve our value.
I'm not sure if I qualify as a customer, but since I just passed 201 a few 
weeks ago and I'm currently working on 202 I might just give my 2 cents.

I would vote for
-more 'procedural' question (e.g. what sequence of tools/steps to use/take to 
archive a certain task) to probe the skill of the candidate and his 
understanding of the exam objectives and
-less name, location and feature fu**ing which 'only' tests your ability to 
(short term) memorize details which might not be true anymore after the next 
major release of the according software packet.

> Maybe have a look on business and employer too.
> Because at the end we design good certificates for pros, which have to be 
> accepted from pros and from industry and provide a value for both sides.
Then I guess one would need to talk to the heads of technical/support 
departments as they usually fire up the requests to HR and set the requirements 
for new employees.

Cheers,
Klaus
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev

Reply via email to