Learning on the job, you learn solutions to your own problems and architectures for your own use-cases. You're not exposed to all areas so remain naive about some features. A good certification will give you a much more holistic view of the platform.
This is all through the lens of Elastic Certified Engineer and various AWS certs though, instead of software development.
I'm currently following a couple of certs for the learning paths, might even take the exam for one if my employer pays for it and the time off
As for cloud stuff, haven’t really done them but I can’t say I’d bother personally. If you know the above topics well it’s easy enough to RTFM and get up to speed.
Edit: perhaps “cloud stuff” too much of a blanket term. For instance, more complex cloud stuff like Kubernetes probably worthwhile certifying in. But that’s useful in multiple cloud environments, as opposed to cloud specific things like AWS.
Again, I haven’t don’t those certs si someone else probably has better idea than me.
if the learning path would be such that you work with a system until you have enough experience that you can pass the test without having to learn for it, then that would be valuable, but the problem is that the certificate does not verify your experience. it verifies that you memorized certain facts without being able to tell how you did that.
A tax collector doesn’t want creative programmers. They want a repeatable process that meets their procurement rules. They may even deliberately choose to make sure that nobody knows how everything works! They boil down a process into functional components, and hire cheap labor to fill in the blanks.
When you’re paying a body shop $40 an hour to have someone move across the planet to sling J2EE or whatever, you’re getting what you pay for. (Remember the contractor would probably get a raise working the night shift at Taco Bell) These certifications boil down to a third party attesting that you sat down somewhere and wrote hello world. In that market, it is valuable.
This is exactly how once-great tech companies die. This is how governments lose the faith of their citizenry.
Operations are handled by a different team than the initial development team - they don't even need to know how to deploy the thing. It's code by numbers, and in that situation, it pays to have someone that doesn't deviate from the number system and the low need for creativity drives the value of the work down and makes the code into a commodity product. Value is low, competition is high, margins are low. Certification is just a sign that you are open for business in that market.
It’s crap work for crap pay. In the 70s and 80s when this stuff was new, it made sense to “grow” and train operators and more blue collar folks driven by runbooks and tight frameworks. Nowadays you just hire low skill folks “off the shelf”.
Still, I find the AWS ecosystem is so vast, and I certainly have gaps in my knowledge. The process of studying for the certs has forced me to approach AWS with a more academic lense, learning some things that I may have not known otherwise.
I can't help but feel like some of these bits of information ultimately give me more context, and may even make me more effective on the platform.
Granted, they don't matter as much once you get to the in-person interviews, but during the screening stage they are helpful (in my anecdotal experience).
They require you to burn a ton of money drafting policies, writing TPS reports, and generally just pushing pencils. Ostensively to improve the security of your SaaS, but really mostly to work as a barrier to entry.
The cost of a full-time compliance officer is minuscule for well-funded startups, but a massive challenge for a bootstrapped business of two people in a garage. Hence well-funded startups do their best to encourage regulation that asks for as many certifications, trials and tribulations as possible.
A random guy with no exposure to software whatsoever can spend a few hours become a Certified Scrum Master (tm).
Unlike CSM, there are certifications that matter, have weight and at least have basic prerequisites.
And I’m not sure he was that far off.
For certain kinds of contract work, and specific things within IT it's one of those 'checkmarks' that can really help, or be essential in some cases.
They don't necessarily make you better at this or that.
Should note: after a very long time in software, I'm still embarrassed at some 'little things' I should know, but don't.
In electrical work, they have apprenticeships and tests for certification. They have apprenticeships in carpentry as well.
I suggest the software world would be much better if we had such a thing. The basics of computer science, plus the basics of applied knowledge in one or more established languages where you learn how to write idiomatic code, basic architecture etc. - and - basic software communication, code reviews etc..
If you have a degree in CS you can skip the first part, but even so many of those spend years without knowing how to write SQL, do basic things on linux, write idiomatic code etc..
I wonder why Google doesn't publish an online course and say 'you need to know these basic things to be a pro dev'.
College - waste of money.
Working - waste of time.
I have a hard time calling that a waste of money.
People vastly underestimate how many doors not having a degree closes for you.
I don't judge them for not exercising this option, as I don't know them, everyone's life situation is different, etc, etc. But they at least have that option, should they [choose to/end up in a position to] work towards it.
A degree doesn't magically open doors for you. But in 2020, not having a degree will actively close doors for you.
To put it another way: A seat belt does not guarantee you will survive a serious car crash, but not having one is not going to help your prospects.
Not liking your job is the most normal thing in the world. It is incredibly privileged to have a job that you actually like doing.
> There are folks where a degree is really just a debt and they'd be better off learning a trade.
There are large problems with going into a trade, too. It's hard work, your body is destroyed after 15-20 years of it, you are incredibly vulnerable to economic cycles, you don't make much money in most of them, unless you become a business owner. It's better than stocking shelves, but that's a pretty low bar to clear.
To tie back to your earlier point, tradespeople almost universally hate their jobs. Most of them like the money, but hate the job.
I think we should all appreciate people's life choices, recognize people's hard work no matter how they went about doing that hard work (military, college, self-taught... who cares) and give people equal opportunities.
I've come to find that this is typically how life plays out anyway, most decent companies aren't particularly worried about the minutia of your background and are much more focused on what you know and what you can bring to the table now, and rightfully so.
I like meritocracies. The world should always operate as a meritocracy. It's 2020 for fucks sake lets end the gate-keeping.
"Do you want fries with that?"
This phrase predates the internet.
I imagine the people who run the cert board are making a fortune at least.
The exams (like any) aren't perfect, but if you pass the CCT, you need to at least be pretty familiar with common pentest tooling and able to use them quickly and under pressure of time.
They're not perfect and some have said they could use some updating.
As to CREST being rolling in cash, you'd be surprised to find out that, as far as I can tell, that's not the case.
The main org. is incorporated in the UK, so you can see their financial statements for free https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09805375/filing-h... is the list and from a look at their latest accounts, you can see it's not big business...
I also don’t take financial reports as gospel. I’m no finance guru but assume it’s possible / easy to hide money, or it gets reinvested into marketing the notion that crest actually matters, the former at which doesn’t make the thing a giant scam at least.
CRT has a practical element which demonstrates knowledge of tools, and the CCT bumps that up quite a bit.
On the second point, I think accusing CREST of financial shenanigans is a bit of a stretch given you think they should make more money than their public accounts show they do.
I don't think there was any practical value in a sense of skills learned while preparing for the certification exams. But it was very low cost - I didn't take any courses, only the exams themselves, and self-studied for them; so mostly it was a time investment, and spare time is plentiful at that age. So I'd say they paid off handily.
A running joke at my last role was that I would keep trying to get the company to pay for my Scrum Master Training, which conveniently had a Hawaii option.
But in all seriousness, what a silly "Certification".
No, but neither does anything else. We (as a civilization) have settled on using tests as an objective proxy to measure knowledge. Although I generally agree that software certifications don’t mean much, saying that they’re useless because they’re tests dismisses almost all forms of education. Lawyers have a bar exam that, if passed, tells you a lot about that person’s knowledge of the law. Just because current software certification exams are relatively easy to pass and don’t tell you much about a candidate, that doesn’t mean that a decent test couldn’t be put together.
In automotive and airspace, you will find that being certified opens a bunch of doors for you.
From a company's perspective, these certification don't PROVE that you know what you are doing, but at least they prove that you aren't completely in the dark with regards to all the annoying processes that exist in the industry (stuff like MISRA-C, Automotive SPICE and so on). Or at the very least, you aren't lying when you say that you've TOTALLY heard of them, honest (un-shockingly, people lie on their resumes, even about things that can be easily checked).
This might not get you hired, but it will make them consider you.
Because of that reason, I got the Google Cloud Architect certification that was paid by my, then, company.
If I were screening people for a Cloud Sysadmin job, I would appreciate the associate certification as it would prove that you are, at least, familiar with the platform. Higher level certifications may help to maintain partner status, and also, in Google Cloud, they're not the classic "memorize the answers" type of exam, so I feel like people going through them have some sort of real life experience.
Anyway, I probably wouldn't use ANY kind of certification as a final decision for hiring somebody, unless we're required to hire a certificated person for any reason. I value experience, interest and learning abilities before certifications. I'd rather hire someone very skilled on googleing solutions than a classic certified guy who memorized a Cisco book.
Edit: It looks like the Partner program is aimed at consultants looking to prove to clients they know how to use Google Cloud
You show you're 'friends' with Google.
You miiiiight get some work through them.
You get to show interesting business cases on their conferences.
You get to know their timelines a bit before the general public.
You can consult them on products when you're getting a bidding ready for a client.
That kind of stuff.
I believe I was hired at the time solely to meet partner level certification quotas of my current company as they definitely didn't need more headcount and there wasn't much to do at the time.
The whole thing really grinds my gears though and I wish it wasn't a necessary evil for me to pursue more of them. I think services such as acloudguru and the like devalued them from a technical perspective, but Amazon puts their finger on the scale with partner requirements keeping them relevant.
So for the company, it’s cheaper for them to buy Cisco equipment by just hiring a CCIE guy, and just letting him sit in the corner and play video games all day at work.
If that’s what you want your career to be about, then I guess getting a CCIE certification is worth it.
Edit: Fixed it.
i will say that if someone wants to pay me to sit in a corner and play games all day, that's fine by me. as i've stated before, a job is a job now-a-days. i'm not looking to change the world, i just want a paycheck.
I think too many people think certs are for them. Rarely are companies going out of their way to build a certification program for your personal benefit.
independent organizations providing certifications may either profit from selling training. (which is fine if the training is good) or the profit comes from the fees to take the test.
linux processional institute for example is not profit oriented and provides the LPI certificates for the benefit of the community. and it's one of the better certificates out there
What did happen instead 2 or 3 times when I was getting some consulting gigs was that the client would try to have me pass some IQ / Aptitude / Whatever else test. I already have a reputation for delivering solutions and whole bunch of nicest references. So I just apologized and walked away. Not playing these kindergarden games.
If they can ... don't hate the player, hate the game. There are certainly more damaging examples of rent-seeking behavior all around us.
Our company has a specialized product that offers multiple certificates with names like Core, Advanced, Expert, etc. The Core and Advanced are free certifications. We provide free access to prep guides, videos, and a community forum.
These two exams are not easy and many fail the first time. But they are free and designed to help identify weak areas while learning the product and its resources. Fortunately our users love our product and many retake a second time.
It has helped create a community within our industry to learn and help each other. It's been wonderful.
If you hire people simply because they hold certs,that's your screw up for not holding a more thorough technical interview.
As for the non-programming like AWS or Scrum Master (WTF) - it's loss of time. Especially Scum Master - it's a scam and it is designed to squeeze you of money by having 3 levels :)
They limit your understanding of the field the certificate pertains to. The value it brings is the things you learned and companies continue to accept and validate it as some useful token. Outside of that it is near worthless.
* Software & IT industry certifications.
You could have learned the same things outside of a certification.
Certifications are a little bit better than certifications.
Without them, we'd be forced to rely even more strongly on interpersonal relationships than we already do.
Are certifications a perfect way to judge someone's competence? definitely not, but at least in the case of that certificate I think it'd be hard to pass the exam without having at least some decent knowledge of which AWS services are the best to use in different business situations.
I literally wrote a longer comment and erased it three times... Meh, don't bother getting certified if you can't see the value of it.
Some certs are more useful than other, of course, my experience getting certified in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL - RHCSA) was immensely positive though: I was forced to do a thorough learning and to level up under many aspects. I'm using a lot of that knowledge everyday even though I don't always use RHEL anymore. And for the ROI... It has paid itself almost immediately and with very good interest.