7 ms·

As an IT college teacher for 21 years, I can tell you that educational institutions are very angry about this change. We often have courses that map to Microsof

As an IT college teacher for 21 years, I can tell you that educational institutions are very angry about this change. We often have courses that map to Microsoft certificaion. Students write them, and employers want them. They are a general benchmark that allows organizations to narrow the list of candidates they interview for a job related to one or more technologies. Most college grads get jobs in small-to-medium organizations where Azure is not a common requirement. Moreover, many small organizations that moved their stuff to Azure at the request of an MSP are current moving it back on premises to save cost now that they realize it's much cheaper to do so. Together with Microsoft's abrupt replacement of the Win10 certifications last year (they gave no notice to colleges or publishers), it looks like the trust colleges have placed in the Microsoft certification program is disappearing fast.

nitrogen 7y ago
I do think this is for the best. Education, whether traditional or applies technical, shouldn't be locked to a single vendor. This may make hiring harder, but other certifications will arise, and in the mean time qualified but uncertified applicants might have a better chance at getting employed.
- syshum 7y ago
  That depends, there is absolute a place for Vendor Certifications. There should also be general and non-vendor certifications. I dont believe MS doing away with all OnPrem Certifications is "for the best"
- jasoneckert 7y ago
  Nearly all colleges are not locked to a single vendor - CompTIA, Cisco, EC-Counsil, LPI, Red Hat, etc. are taught equally. The point I was hoping to convey earlier was that Microsoft is now going to disappear from that vendor and organization list.
  - tarellel 7y ago
    I beg to differ, I went to a community college and everything was locked in to Microsoft; certs, software, and MS approved coiurse guidelines (MS had given them some sizable grants to push the students to leave and use their products. I know work for our states biggest university and it’s still the same way. Literally out of thousands of employees our small group in IT are the only ones using macs and building/deploying products in a Linux environment. Being in the position I’m in allows me to get a look at the other Colleges/Universities across the state and it’s pretty much the same process across the board. A fair enough chunk of CS students coming in are disappointed about the M$ based CS tracks. They came in expecting to learn Linux, Python, Ruby, JS, Docker, and k8s. I’m hoping in the future in the CS guidelines will diversify and let people choose either a OSS/programming, MS, and Cisco/Networking tracks to be a little more open to real world needs.
    - rjbwork 7y ago
      I'm surprised there's any emphasis on Windows in a CS course. I'm a C#/cloud dev and I use Windows as my daily driver, but we were allowed to use any OS we wanted. Only catch was that for some courses our final projects had to run on the school's Linux server, which we could SSH into and compile and run our code on.
  - gerdesj 7y ago
    Good riddance. I say that as the owner of an MS Partner! I want potential consultants, not people with one trick up their sleeve. Blow Red Hat: I want an applicant describing how they installed Arch or Gentoo and only use say RH or whatever to tick supportability boxes for something. Someone who can install Gentoo already knows how to fix all other broken Linux boxes, without breaking into a sweat. A completely broken Linux box does not faze me because I spent many years repairing the fallout of running emerge. Cisco. Hmm well at least it is reasonably easy to translate into Dell or HP. Juniperese on the other hand is rather different. Given that Cisco invented nearly everything including some horrendous security exploits, I'll let that slide!
    - freedomben 7y ago
scarface74 7y ago
It’s very much anecdotal that corporations are moving back on prem. All statistics show other wise. I’m very much in the “Enterprise Development” space and not the “learn leetCode and work for a FAANG” category, but I haven’t seen any indication that employees care about the development focused certifications. Maybe the TSYS type warm body shops but that’s about it.
peterkelly 7y ago
I think industry certifications are a mostly pointless idea. If I'm looking at learning something, my criteria is "will this information still be relevant 10 years from now?" If the answer is no, I either don't bother with it, or I invest the minimum necessary effort to learn what I need to do to solve the problem at hand. Technologies that certifications focus on tend to have a limited lifespan. I place far more value on more general, conceptual knowledge that will be applicable to a multitude of implementations, mixed with some practical hands-on stuff. I've gotten far more out of learning about things like relational databases, compilers, multi-threaded and message passing programming, distributed systems, and experience with a range of different programming paradigms than I believe could ever be gained from certifications. Focusing on generic topics like this is going to be far more valuable to your career in the long run. If I see a company specifically looking for someone with a certification or experience with a particular library/framework, I take that as a sign that they don't fully appreciate the value that a well-rounded engineer can bring to the table. Furthermore, certifications have the effect of tying your advertised skill set to a specific vendor's products, and expect you to keep up to date every three years or so as they change the specifics of their training and certification requirements. My company, a contracting firm, recently ran some AWS training sessions and offered to cover the costs of the exams for employee who wanted to do them. I went along to a couple of sessions but ultimately concluded it wasn't a good use of my time, relative to other things I could be doing to advance my career. While I'm fortunate to mostly work for clients who understand that, I wish there were a wider appreciation of general knowledge rather than people investing themselves so heavily into skills that have a short lifespan and are tied so heavily to specific vendors and the current flavor of the month.
- anonsivalley652 7y ago
  Lol. Yeap, that's about it. Most certs are mostly a scam to let non-technical hiring managers and HR people give themselves some virtue-signaling brownie points. I was an AWS Sr. Systems Engineer consultant with a preferred vendor working on-prem for Fortune 200's. No certifications other than a BS CS/EE, was an undergrad (unusual) security researcher at a top lab, VMware and the intro MCSA exam; but no A+, CCIE, ITIL, PMP and no MCSE. One of the top *nix/Windows sr. sysadmins for the US MIL's DMDC has only VMware certs. Security researchers and offensive security folks: few, if any, certs beyond (usually) university.
gerdesj 7y ago
As an employer (IT consultancy), I in particular do not mark up for MS qualis. I generally drop those to the bottom of the stack for lacking originality if that is nearly all that is shown in support. I want to see things like engineering, maths and science degrees, actually any degree will do that shows critical thinking. I'll take a HND in palaeontology in preference to a MS fellowship with a signed photo of Bill G over their headboard any day. At least I'll get someone who has legendary attention to detail and the ability to follow a chain of inferences and gather clues. They'll also be able to completely piss on anyone who starts going on about their first PC or programming language as though that is some sort of ancient history. Please Mr IT teacher: Give me critical thinkers, not drones.
- missosoup 7y ago
  I call these McQualifications. They're a negative signal when I see them in a CV. Virtually all certification schemes are a scam with extra steps. Candidates who don't see the scam for what it is, are bottom of the barrel. Likewise employers who bought into the scam are bottom of the barrel.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Except they are an hiring requirement for the Cisco, SAP, Adobe, Oracle... consulting partners.
    - missosoup 7y ago
      Yes, that's the scam part of it. Vendors have placed a toll booth between job seekers and jobs in fields where vendors have enough sway with employers to convince them to make their certifications a hiring requirement.
      - LargoLasskhyfv 7y ago
        It's not only the vendors, it's the market around that too. I just remembered which company did my certification, clicked on the link from ddg and got Secure Connection Failed An error occurred during a connection to www.pearsonitcertification.com. Cannot communicate securely with peer: no common encryption algorithm(s). Error code: SSL_ERROR_NO_CYPHER_OVERLAP Yeah. Right. /me giggles edit: Hm. May have giggled too soon, because https://home.pearsonvue.com/ https://home.pearsonvue.com/ works. Don't know how the link above is related to them.
jghn 7y ago
Anecdotal, but as a hiring manager I can't remember the last time I cared that a candidate had an industry certification. It's not even a positive signal, it's zero signal in either direction.
greggyb 7y ago
My own experience does not match yours. Both in being hired for roles in Microsoft-focused shops and in hiring and growing a team at a Microsoft partner. My own lack of certs has never been an issue. When I have been hiring, I've actually built up a bias against certs, as the people who have talked the most about certs have ended up the worst employees. And those who have sought certs rather than experience have ended up worse off than their opposites. I recognize both my relatively small sample size and various cognitive biases that creep into this. Thus, I strive to completely ignore certs. I had several employees who were required to complete Microsoft certs for us to keep our Gold Partner status with Microsoft. Those who completed them mostly considered them a waste of time. Sometimes there were learning opportunities simply that a feature exists. No one ever became better at their job or designed better solutions based on certs. My conclusion ultimately is that, at least so far as Microsoft is concerned, the certs are for trivia. They're not useless, they are just literally trivial. Note, here trivial does not mean easy.

nitrogen 7y ago

I do think this is for the best. Education, whether traditional or applies technical, shouldn't be locked to a single vendor. This may make hiring harder, but other certifications will arise, and in the mean time qualified but uncertified applicants might have a better chance at getting employed.

syshum 7y ago
That depends, there is absolute a place for Vendor Certifications. There should also be general and non-vendor certifications. I dont believe MS doing away with all OnPrem Certifications is "for the best"
jasoneckert 7y ago
Nearly all colleges are not locked to a single vendor - CompTIA, Cisco, EC-Counsil, LPI, Red Hat, etc. are taught equally. The point I was hoping to convey earlier was that Microsoft is now going to disappear from that vendor and organization list.
- tarellel 7y ago
  I beg to differ, I went to a community college and everything was locked in to Microsoft; certs, software, and MS approved coiurse guidelines (MS had given them some sizable grants to push the students to leave and use their products. I know work for our states biggest university and it’s still the same way. Literally out of thousands of employees our small group in IT are the only ones using macs and building/deploying products in a Linux environment. Being in the position I’m in allows me to get a look at the other Colleges/Universities across the state and it’s pretty much the same process across the board. A fair enough chunk of CS students coming in are disappointed about the M$ based CS tracks. They came in expecting to learn Linux, Python, Ruby, JS, Docker, and k8s. I’m hoping in the future in the CS guidelines will diversify and let people choose either a OSS/programming, MS, and Cisco/Networking tracks to be a little more open to real world needs.
  - rjbwork 7y ago
    I'm surprised there's any emphasis on Windows in a CS course. I'm a C#/cloud dev and I use Windows as my daily driver, but we were allowed to use any OS we wanted. Only catch was that for some courses our final projects had to run on the school's Linux server, which we could SSH into and compile and run our code on.
- gerdesj 7y ago
  Good riddance. I say that as the owner of an MS Partner! I want potential consultants, not people with one trick up their sleeve. Blow Red Hat: I want an applicant describing how they installed Arch or Gentoo and only use say RH or whatever to tick supportability boxes for something. Someone who can install Gentoo already knows how to fix all other broken Linux boxes, without breaking into a sweat. A completely broken Linux box does not faze me because I spent many years repairing the fallout of running emerge. Cisco. Hmm well at least it is reasonably easy to translate into Dell or HP. Juniperese on the other hand is rather different. Given that Cisco invented nearly everything including some horrendous security exploits, I'll let that slide!
  - freedomben 7y ago

scarface74 7y ago

It’s very much anecdotal that corporations are moving back on prem. All statistics show other wise. I’m very much in the “Enterprise Development” space and not the “learn leetCode and work for a FAANG” category, but I haven’t seen any indication that employees care about the development focused certifications. Maybe the TSYS type warm body shops but that’s about it.

peterkelly 7y ago

I think industry certifications are a mostly pointless idea. If I'm looking at learning something, my criteria is "will this information still be relevant 10 years from now?" If the answer is no, I either don't bother with it, or I invest the minimum necessary effort to learn what I need to do to solve the problem at hand. Technologies that certifications focus on tend to have a limited lifespan. I place far more value on more general, conceptual knowledge that will be applicable to a multitude of implementations, mixed with some practical hands-on stuff. I've gotten far more out of learning about things like relational databases, compilers, multi-threaded and message passing programming, distributed systems, and experience with a range of different programming paradigms than I believe could ever be gained from certifications. Focusing on generic topics like this is going to be far more valuable to your career in the long run. If I see a company specifically looking for someone with a certification or experience with a particular library/framework, I take that as a sign that they don't fully appreciate the value that a well-rounded engineer can bring to the table. Furthermore, certifications have the effect of tying your advertised skill set to a specific vendor's products, and expect you to keep up to date every three years or so as they change the specifics of their training and certification requirements. My company, a contracting firm, recently ran some AWS training sessions and offered to cover the costs of the exams for employee who wanted to do them. I went along to a couple of sessions but ultimately concluded it wasn't a good use of my time, relative to other things I could be doing to advance my career. While I'm fortunate to mostly work for clients who understand that, I wish there were a wider appreciation of general knowledge rather than people investing themselves so heavily into skills that have a short lifespan and are tied so heavily to specific vendors and the current flavor of the month.

anonsivalley652 7y ago
Lol. Yeap, that's about it. Most certs are mostly a scam to let non-technical hiring managers and HR people give themselves some virtue-signaling brownie points. I was an AWS Sr. Systems Engineer consultant with a preferred vendor working on-prem for Fortune 200's. No certifications other than a BS CS/EE, was an undergrad (unusual) security researcher at a top lab, VMware and the intro MCSA exam; but no A+, CCIE, ITIL, PMP and no MCSE. One of the top *nix/Windows sr. sysadmins for the US MIL's DMDC has only VMware certs. Security researchers and offensive security folks: few, if any, certs beyond (usually) university.

gerdesj 7y ago

As an employer (IT consultancy), I in particular do not mark up for MS qualis. I generally drop those to the bottom of the stack for lacking originality if that is nearly all that is shown in support. I want to see things like engineering, maths and science degrees, actually any degree will do that shows critical thinking. I'll take a HND in palaeontology in preference to a MS fellowship with a signed photo of Bill G over their headboard any day. At least I'll get someone who has legendary attention to detail and the ability to follow a chain of inferences and gather clues. They'll also be able to completely piss on anyone who starts going on about their first PC or programming language as though that is some sort of ancient history. Please Mr IT teacher: Give me critical thinkers, not drones.

missosoup 7y ago
I call these McQualifications. They're a negative signal when I see them in a CV. Virtually all certification schemes are a scam with extra steps. Candidates who don't see the scam for what it is, are bottom of the barrel. Likewise employers who bought into the scam are bottom of the barrel.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Except they are an hiring requirement for the Cisco, SAP, Adobe, Oracle... consulting partners.
  - missosoup 7y ago
    Yes, that's the scam part of it. Vendors have placed a toll booth between job seekers and jobs in fields where vendors have enough sway with employers to convince them to make their certifications a hiring requirement.
    - LargoLasskhyfv 7y ago
      It's not only the vendors, it's the market around that too. I just remembered which company did my certification, clicked on the link from ddg and got Secure Connection Failed An error occurred during a connection to www.pearsonitcertification.com. Cannot communicate securely with peer: no common encryption algorithm(s). Error code: SSL_ERROR_NO_CYPHER_OVERLAP Yeah. Right. /me giggles edit: Hm. May have giggled too soon, because https://home.pearsonvue.com/ https://home.pearsonvue.com/ works. Don't know how the link above is related to them.

jghn 7y ago

Anecdotal, but as a hiring manager I can't remember the last time I cared that a candidate had an industry certification. It's not even a positive signal, it's zero signal in either direction.

greggyb 7y ago

My own experience does not match yours. Both in being hired for roles in Microsoft-focused shops and in hiring and growing a team at a Microsoft partner. My own lack of certs has never been an issue. When I have been hiring, I've actually built up a bias against certs, as the people who have talked the most about certs have ended up the worst employees. And those who have sought certs rather than experience have ended up worse off than their opposites. I recognize both my relatively small sample size and various cognitive biases that creep into this. Thus, I strive to completely ignore certs. I had several employees who were required to complete Microsoft certs for us to keep our Gold Partner status with Microsoft. Those who completed them mostly considered them a waste of time. Sometimes there were learning opportunities simply that a feature exists. No one ever became better at their job or designed better solutions based on certs. My conclusion ultimately is that, at least so far as Microsoft is concerned, the certs are for trivia. They're not useless, they are just literally trivial. Note, here trivial does not mean easy.