Does Linus have any Certifications like CCNA, A+ etc

[leadeater]

On 2/25/2022 at 8:04 PM, LAwLz said:

That might be true for lower tier certificates like A+, but I assure you that it is not true for the higher tier ones like CCIE. It's not something you can "power through".

Again, not all certificates are the same.

Not even CCNP. Even with a lot of very good work/industry experience directly in networking one will not breeze through CCNP without proper study for it. That's the thing about CCNP & CCIE is they are testing you on the wider knowledge not section(s) of it that have been applicable to your job, network size and business needs. You can be a very experienced network engineer that can design and implement networks to a high standard and still fail the certification test. However the reverse situation is also true and that is the flip side of why I'm not a huge fan of certifications either, all paper and no experience makes for a weak foundation.

 

I view certifications as a way to compliment experience that is in a sector not directly applicable to the certification you are obtaining as a means to transition career path. This is strictly in terms of an individual professional.

 

Here's the real situation in the industry when it comes to certifications, at least from what I have seen and how I view it. Certifications are most important to MSP's, Consulting and Contractors. Industry vendors like Cisco, HPE, Dell/EMC, Netapp, Juniper etc require partners to hold a certain percentage of certified employees to attain and maintain partnership status and level and this is for assurance that the companies representing their products and giving advice/support actually know what they are talking about because they are their company's front line and that affects their brand image. The only reliable way to measure and ensure this high standard is through certifications.

 

Then on the customer side, what we look for, is that partnership status and to what level they hold accompanied by reference projects and customers and a good conversation to get a feel for how much they really know and what kind of support they can offer.

 

If you work for a business in an internal IT team then certifications are less valuable to your employer, however if you work for an MSP or similar then certifications have a direct importance to the business and that is often why they will pay for them.

[LAwLz]

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

You can be a very experienced network engineer that can design and implement networks to a high standard and still fail the certification test. However the reverse situation is also true and that is the flip side of why I'm not a huge fan of certifications either, all paper and no experience makes for a weak foundation.

I would however argue that the first situation is far more likely than the second situation.

Someone who has passed for example the CCNP is far more likely to be a very experienced network engineer, compared to the risk of someone with a CCNP having no experience.

 

If you hire someone with a CCNP then the odds of that person being an experienced network engineer might be like 80%, and if we're talking about a CCIE then it's like 99%. Sure there are still some people that might get through the certification and not be that experienced, but the risk is extremely low judging by the people I know.

It's important to make that point when talking about anything where something can be one way or the complete opposite. What are the likelihood of each scenario being true.

 

 

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

Here's the real situation in the industry when it comes to certifications, at least from what I have seen and how I view it.

-snip-

Yeah, this is basically the same as what I mentioned on page one when someone said certificates were worthless.

They are not worthless for consultants, vendor partners or when applying for jobs.

• For consultants it affects how much you can charge your client, which in turn means your salary will probably be lower.
• For vendor partners it affects things like rebates. Lower partner status = less rebates = have to take lower profit margins or not be as competitive on pricing.
• For applying to jobs it is a merit similar to those you get in schools. It makes you more attractive to employers because they have more confidence in your knowledge.

If you already have a job at some internal IT team then I can see why you might personally not benefit from certificates, especially not if you need to pay for them yourself. But that's a very narrow view of the industry. It's like if I were to say "you don't have to know how to use Windows if you're going to work in IT, because the school I happen to do first line IT for runs Chromebooks". Yeah, it might be true for your particular job, but that's far from the only job that exists in the world of IT.

[leadeater]

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Someone who has passed for example the CCNP is far more likely to be a very experienced network engineer, compared to the risk of someone with a CCNP having no experience.

There are a lot of people in the world that exist with many certifications with no proper experience. "Certificate collectors" are a real thing. One of the problems hiring new employees is the sheer number of these people that apply that you have to weed out, many don't even get an interview. Not like it's a hard problem but there are more applicants like this than those that are getting a worth while consideration.

 

Looking at who gets hired isn't the way to look at it or identify the problem, because you should be hiring the correct person not the paper only person.

 

I could study for and pass CCNP however I would not use that to apply for a networking position at my work if I was not already an employee. While I have strong networking experiences it's not of the right scale and scope for here, I would however be comfortable getting CCNP and internally transitioning to the networking team. So there is an example of where a certification would have value to a corporate IT employee, essentially an example I already gave? I forget heh.

[leadeater]

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

If you already have a job at some internal IT team then I can see why you might personally not benefit from certificates, especially not if you need to pay for them yourself. But that's a very narrow view of the industry. It's like if I were to say "you don't have to know how to use Windows if you're going to work in IT, because the school I happen to do first line IT for runs Chromebooks". Yeah, it might be true for your particular job, but that's far from the only job that exists in the world of IT.

As a Systems Engineer with a lot of experience in many different products why would I need to get lets say a few Commvault certifications simply because that is the backup product we use? If I were to apply for a job at another company and one of the primary roles for that position was backup technical lead and their backup product vendor of choice was Veeam what use and applicability would Commvault certifications be? The products are nothing alike, not even close.

 

My overall work experience is of far more importance than a certification in a particular product and there is no guarantee that it has "transferable worth".

 

And the same is true for Netapp, Dell/EMC, IBM, Lenovo, Simplivity, Cohesity blah blah etc etc i.e. the majority of industry certifications are only directly useful to MSP and the like. There are more broadly applicable ones that are in general useful like CCNA & CCNP or a few of the Microsoft ones but even the Microsoft ones get in to specialist areas real fast so you'd always have to be doing the job role responsibility for it to have any real ongoing value and worth to get it on your own dime.

 

Remember there are A LOT of industry certifications and the Cisco ones only represent a tiny fraction and happen to be some of the few that hold any actual broad recognition. Therefore I would say my view is winder than what you are saying or thinking and your own view because I'm commenting on the wider certifications not the few I personally know of and my opinion on them i.e. Cisco.

 

Like there is a reason CCNA, A+ etc get brought up in questions and discussions like these and not the other 99.99% of certifications that exist. "Is CCNA worth it?" is a different question to "Are industry certifications worth it?".

[Rex Hite]

I think industry certifications are a bit of a side hustle to create product evangelists while offloading the costs of teaching.

Companies like Cisco, MS etc should be paying people to learn this stuff, not the other way around.

"sixteen tons, and what do you get...I owe my soul to the company store...."

[LAwLz]

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

-snip-

I feel like your entire post is just strawmanning me.

 

 

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

There are a lot of people in the world that exist with many certifications with no proper experience. "Certificate collectors" are a real thing.

I never denied this, but as I said here:

19 hours ago, LAwLz said:

If you hire someone with a CCNP then the odds of that person being an experienced network engineer might be like 80%, and if we're talking about a CCIE then it's like 99%. Sure there are still some people that might get through the certification and not be that experienced, but the risk is extremely low judging by the people I know.

Stop thinking in such black and white terms.

 

 

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

Looking at who gets hired isn't the way to look at it or identify the problem, because you should be hiring the correct person not the paper only person.

When did I say you shouldn't hire the correct person?

My point is that finding "the correct person" is hard and as an employer you will look at merits, of which certification is one of them. Work experience and degrees are two other examples.

 

 

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

I could study for and pass CCNP however I would not use that to apply for a networking position at my work if I was not already an employee.

So if you were unemployed and tried to apply for a networking job, you would not bring up having a CCNP if you had one? That's just stupid on your part.

It's when you apply for new jobs that certifications can matter a lot.

[leadeater]

32 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

When did I say you shouldn't hire the correct person?

My point is that finding "the correct person" is hard and as an employer you will look at merits, of which certification is one of them. Work experience and degrees are two other examples.

Your example was a person who was hired that had the cert, that ignores that higher percentage of applicants that were not hired and who were also likely not interviewed who had CCNA/CCNP etc. I know this to be a real thing because I've seen how many apply for positions where I work and I know what proportion get binned and I also know how many of those had certifications.

 

32 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

So if you were unemployed and tried to apply for a networking job, you would not bring up having a CCNP if you had one? That's just stupid on your part.

It's when you apply for new jobs that certifications can matter a lot.

If you don't have work experience CCNP alone will not get you a job, often not even an interview. There is a reason job advertisements have minimum required experience and no certification no matter how "significant" bypasses that. CCIE will not get to a job that requires CCNA and 3-5 years experience if you have zero years experience, NOT a made up example.

 

Edit:

I feel you are entirely missing the point. Certifications are not a replacement for experience ever, there is no situation this will ever be true. My experience as a System Engineer is of limited transferability to Networking and a certification could be used to bridge but I would always be at a disadvantage to those with actual networking experience which is why I gave the example I did of an internal team move versus being an external applicant.

[LAwLz]

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

As a Systems Engineer with a lot of experience in many different products why would I need to get lets say a few Commvault certifications simply because that is the backup product we use?

If you worked at an MSP/VAR, had a partnership with Commvault and needed to uphold your partnership status or were applying for a job at a place that used Commvault, then I would argue that a certificate would be helpful in getting the job.

I have said nothing less and nothing more than that. Again, it feels like you replied without reading my post and as a result are just making strawman arguments.

 

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

My overall work experience is of far more importance than a certification in a particular product and there is no guarantee that it has "transferable worth".

Except this whole conversation started because someone said experience from CCNA would not be transferable to Dell or Netgear equipment.

Neither I nor anyone else have ever said anything about backup solutions.

 

 

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

Therefore I would say my view is winder than what you are saying or thinking and your own view because I'm commenting on the wider certifications not the few I personally know of and my opinion on them i.e. Cisco.

I think the problem here is that you inserted yourself into a conversation without having read all of it, and as a result you are talking about things neither I nor the other person was talking about. Again, the entire conversation started because someone said CCNA was Cisco specific and the knowledge was not transferable to other vendors like Dell.

[leadeater]

34 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Except this whole conversation started because someone said experience from CCNA would not be transferable to Dell or Netgear equipment.

Neither I nor anyone else have ever said anything about backup solutions.

 

34 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I think the problem here is that you inserted yourself into a conversation without having read all of it, and as a result you are talking about things neither I nor the other person was talking about. Again, the entire conversation started because someone said CCNA was Cisco specific and the knowledge was not transferable to other vendors like Dell.

 

I read these just fine and I never disagreed. None of my post at all have ever disagreed with that. You're not not reading what I'm saying and apply your own argument to what I have said, I'd suggest stop arguing with yourself and try again from the start. It'll make a lot more sense what I have been saying if you do that.

 

34 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

If you worked at an MSP/VAR, had a partnership with Commvault and needed to uphold your partnership status or were applying for a job at a place that used Commvault, then I would argue that a certificate would be helpful in getting the job.

Literally why I said if you are not one of these, as above, how about we start again after you have done this?

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

I feel you are entirely missing the point. Certifications are not a replacement for experience ever, there is no situation this will ever be true.

I have never, not once, throughout the entire thread said that it is. I am not sure why you or other people in this thread act like I have.

I have said that having a certificate is one type of merit. That is it.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

I have never, not once, throughout the entire thread said that it is. I am not sure why you or other people in this thread act like I have.

I have said that having a certificate is one type of merit. That is it.

I know, and I don't think the thread, you, or I are saying that either or the opposite either but it's the way you are reading and replying is if it is, on either side of the point of view. Such is why you aren't understanding the wider points I was making.

 

It's how you reply and what points you argue, especially in the way that you did that creates the problems, which leads in to a death spiral of counter arguments about something that was never said in the first place 

 

Additional points of view and contextual situations don't have to be treated as specific counter arguments to your own point of view that are trying to disprove them or change your mind. Even with more broad and recognized certifications like the Cisco ones it's important to make clear to those asking about them why and how they are of value, when that value is most strong and when it is not. All certificates fall under this however some more so like the Commvault ones I mentioned.

 

There is no such thing as a broad generic answer of "yes CCNA is always worth getting" because that is not true at all. This reality does not in any way diminish the certificate and it's value within the industry. Overselling a certification is just as much of a problem as underselling it, some would get more value out of not spending their own money and time on getting say CCNA than seeking work experience or a different educational path.

[LAwLz]

On 2/28/2022 at 2:24 PM, leadeater said:

Such is why you aren't understanding the wider points I was making.

Can you please elaborate on this wider point you were making? 

 

On 2/28/2022 at 2:24 PM, leadeater said:

It's how you reply and what points you argue

What points am I arguing specifically? I feel like you have misunderstood me so I want you to explain which points you think I have made.

 

On 2/28/2022 at 2:24 PM, leadeater said:

There is no such thing as a broad generic answer of "yes CCNA is always worth getting" because that is not true at all.

I have never said anything even remotely like that either, so if you are merely "bringing up additional points of views" then it feels very weird to bring up things that nobody has ever said.

 

If I started responding to your posts with "certs aren't useless. Certs have their place." wouldn't you think I was misunderstanding your post and then try and elaborate on what you meant? I feel like that's what's happening here.

I said one thing, and you replied in a very similar manner to what someone who misunderstood me would say. That caused me to elaborate my point.

[Kisai]

On 2/28/2022 at 5:24 AM, leadeater said:

 

 

It's how you reply and what points you argue, especially in the way that you did that creates the problems, which leads in to a death spiral of counter arguments about something that was never said in the first place 

 

You tend to do that yourself as well. This entire page of the thread is you and them having a meaningless argument, when neither of you work in the US or Canada where paper tends to matter to HR people.

 

Does Linus have certifications? I don't know, why not ask him? Chances are when he worked for NCIX he was probably asked or forced to get A+ to work on customers computers, otherwise it's not a valuable certification, and CompTIA has completely devalued it's certifications by claiming that they expire. They've literately sent me an email every month since inception wanting me to renew. Why the hell would I give them any more money when the only reason I even bothered to was to get some monkeys off my back. Which I might add I didn't even study for, the hardest things involve laser printers, since most people don't own laser printers back then or even now.

 

Everyone knows A+ and Network+ certifications are completely worthless, and if someone won't hire you without it, then you know you're applying for a McDonalds of IT. It will suck. You don't want that job anyway.

 

The more interesting certifications are for Microsoft and Cisco products, but even then, if you're going through the effort have getting that certificate, I'd assume you already had a comfortable understanding of their products. If you get certified, you can demand a higher salary. That's all it amounts to. It does not prove you know better than someone who isn't.

 

And that's the problem with getting through the HR hiring process. The HR people don't know you, you can't talk your way through an interview on your experience alone to get to a second round (Which actually deals with people you'd be working with.) The paper exists entirely to go "yeah I did the work", it's basically a warranty card so you have an edge over someone who doesn't.

 

That's the unfortunate problem of certifications in any field. If few people have them, they are valuable and you can command a higher salary. If nearly everyone has them, they are value-less, and if you are unwilling to go through the effort to be certified, you're not even going to get through the front door of the hiring process, because the floor has been set at "certified in X", you're basically reducing yourself to "intern" until you get certified.

 

[Legitsu]

you can make an argument for having CCNP/CCIE

tho I disagree with any certification being attached to a vendor of hardware because their interest is selling you on their ecosystem and not on teaching you 

 

but A+ Net+ CompTIA, are absolutely worthless MCP Is nearly worthless as well 

 

NONE Of those certifications actually teach anybody how stuff works I swear CompSCI100/101 probably will learn you more than all 4 of those combined

if your  help wanted  lists A+ or CompTIA as a requirement Run away you don't want to be there  

 

and for heaven's sake don't spend money on A+ or CompTIA and think its going to get you hired It won't 

I feel bad for the poor sobs that get suckered by community college recruiters with promises of  high-5 or 6 figure incomes and all you get is crippling student debt 4 years of your life wasted, and a job at your local supermarket 

[leadeater]

15 hours ago, Kisai said:

You tend to do that yourself as well. This entire page of the thread is you and them having a meaningless argument, when neither of you work in the US or Canada where paper tends to matter to HR people.

I bet you think it's more important in the US and Canada than it really is. I'm not devoid of global opinion on A+, also I never said CCNA or any Cisco cert was not good or held in high regard either, in fact I have said the very opposite. I just don't think it's a good idea to always say yes to getting it without wider consideration of other factors.

 

Of course if someone just want to get it out of personal growth and satisfaction then that is more than enough reason to get such a certification. There are many reasons to go get them and not all of them have to be directly related to immediately advancing career prospects.

 

I'm simply not going to stand around and say getting XYZ certification is always a good idea because that's simply not what I believe and nor do I believe XYZ certification is going to get you a specifically higher likelihood of a job because those are only one of many things employers look for and it's not the highest factor on the list either. Understanding this reality is more important than simply arguing the worth of a certification alone in isolation because that really does not actually offer any help to people asking if they are worth getting. This is the very same issue with people and academics pushing people in to college and university studies, taking on debt being sold up the river on the promise of better employment prospects when the reality is just not that simple.

 

17 hours ago, LAwLz said:

What points am I arguing specifically? I feel like you have misunderstood me so I want you to explain which points you think I have made.

I was simply just having a conversation, nothing more. Opinions are allowed to be different and I'm allowed to talk about situations not covered that I think are important. You're quite welcome to hold a different opinion, just remember if I give an example of an internal IT employee in an exemplar company and explain why a certification many not be as useful to obtain that doesn't mean you have to counter it with a different example. I'm well aware of the importance of certifications in other situations, I made an entire section of a post about it, in fact that was almost entirely what the post was about.

 

If you cannot remember I made the post and those points then that is something you should address yourself. I do not need to re-elaborate what is literally the post at the top of this page. A post you literally agreed to.

 

So I legitimately have no idea what you are wanting from me or want to discuss. You took issue with something I said about a specific situation because another different situation is different? Should I need to spell out the issue there? Situation A != Situation B/C/D/E/F etc. I can and should have a different response and opinion for those different situations. Saying there are situations were certification(s) have less value is not saying they have no value, something you seem to be interpreting it as 

 

If for yet another example a person is working Service Desk role and they are interested in getting in to networking studying for CCNA does not actually give you a high likelihood of transitioning directly to such a role, within your existing employer or moving company. So I don't feel giving that impression is a good idea or of value to such a person in that situation. If they are lucky they are in a company like mine where the IT department is a few hundred people and many different teams with an ability to express an interest in career advancement and a desire to transition to another team/role where you'll actually get the support you need to do that and that doesn't have to be from certifications paid for by the company. Internal training and internal internship in another team is the more common path where I work, getting to spend time with that team and do supervised work is an excellent way of advancing career but I do recognize not everyone will have this opportunity like my employer offers.

 

17 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I have never said anything even remotely like that either, so if you are merely "bringing up additional points of views" then it feels very weird to bring up things that nobody has ever said.

I say that because you also keep just countering with things and examples not related or relevant to what I actually said. So the only logical conclusion is that is the type of thing you are going to say or believe or want to push towards so I may as well cut to the chase and say it. As above discuss what is said or the example, don't just counter with an entirely different thing as if it actually mattered to what was being said, because it could very well not be.

 

And yes I feel you are overselling Cisco certifications currently, simply based on your persistence of counter points rather than asking more about the situations given in posts and asking why I believe that for that situation. I do not need to be told of the value and importance of those certifications, I've worked for an MSP company and I currently work in an inhouse IT team so I've been on both sides of that fence. Where you'll find most difference in our opinions, probably, on this is specifically people already employed in my type of situation which is why I used that example for when the value of obtaining certifications is lower. Also not all companies will recognize your efforts in that situation if you do get certifications and offer a higher pay or position advancement.

 

As a reminder I was not ever making a counter argument to anything you said originally. You said something I agree with, I quoted it because what you said was part of the discussion I wanted to address and expand on with my own point of view and including what you said seemed necessary. Your first reply back wasn't even a counter argument of mine either, as was mine to yours, however you made a statement I did not agree with based on my work experience and roles I have done during that. That statement being about hiring someone with a certification which is entirely backwards to how hiring actually works (for why read below section for that).

 

P.S. One of your points of view is based on people you know working in the industry, which is a bias itself. I've been part of the hiring process so I'm not isolating to people I know or who have interacted with. When a position is advertised and you get 300-1000 applicants, the majority of whom hold one or multiple certifications, that don't make it past even the HR screening may in fact shock you. Because after that initial phase, with consultation during that from my Infrastructure Manager, there can be as little left to consider for interview as 20. This is why I disagreed with your example that started with the statement "hired person" because my real life experience with hiring tells a much different tale to how you framed it. If 500 of 1000 had lets just say CCNA or higher and only 20 of those 500, so 480 never even got a consideration for an interview, does that not portray that there are issues about certifications overall and there is more to the story that needs to be told?