Charlotte Foust
cfoust at infostatsystems.com
Wed Feb 5 09:55:00 CST 2003
Any job that *requires* certification is one where the company uses that in their marketing or where the company has no clue as to the real job requirements and so falls back on certification in the belief that it means something. Certification means you have studied some courses and passed some tests. It does NOT mean you know how to do a particular job. I have resisted certifications for years and will continue to do so unless my employer decides to fork out the dough and to free up my time to do the courses. I've also met MBAs who couldn't balance a checkbook, and most companies realize that and allow substitution of experience for the much vaunted (and expensive) certifications. Charlotte Foust -----Original Message----- From: Jeanine Scott [mailto:jscott at mchsi.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 6:30 PM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: RE: [AccessD] RE: [Accessed] .net Personally, this scares me! Anyone else worried? -----Original Message----- From: accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Jim Lawrence (AccessD) Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:52 PM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: [AccessD] RE: [Accessed] .net Hi All: Just a comment about the way things are going. One of the main money makers for MS is the charges related to courses and various certifications. There are becoming more standard requirements and it costs more to obtain and maintain these certification levels. Certification for one path, if you take the suggested courses, acquire the suggested books and pay for the exams, can cost up to 8 thousand dollars (CAN). Every couple of years there is a new upgrade and a new series of training, course material and exams. If your company is a MS partner these costs can strap you into a treadmill of payment to MS. So it is in MS's favour to continue upgrading and modifying their products. With the shrinking of the tech market, employers can demand and get people with higher and higher levels of education, training and certification. Case in point; Check out the job opening for 'Google's' staff needs. Two years ago they were just looking for competent web programmers and they are still looking for competent web programmers but they must also have PHD's in computer science. Jim -----Original Message----- From: accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-admin at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Charlotte Foust Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:44 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: RE: [AccessD] .net Well, that certainly lets me out! <vbg> I'm just a working developer, not a star. Charlotte Foust -----Original Message----- From: Mwp.Reid at Queens-Belfast.AC.UK [mailto:Mwp.Reid at Queens-Belfast.AC.UK] Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:18 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: Re: [AccessD] .net I would say that coming are many changes to the way we use SQL Server and MSDE and Access. I would guess that some of these changes will not be for the better. Access has a massive installed user and developer base and will always be about. .NET is Microsoft strategic direction in programming applications and the web. Up to each programmer if they stick with Access or move to .NET. There will always be Acess work there. Theres work with SQL Server and MSDE thats in the nature of the beast just like Oracle. Big relational systems running the enterprise need work. Nice and easy. NO one ever said SQL Server was maintenace free but there are many developments taking place to relieve the DBA of day to day work fore example built in dynamic performance monitoring. IBM and DB2 have some interesting areas. JET got the job done until you scale up and have 20000 users and terrabytes of data. In my view MSDE was a marketing ploy. Nothing else. For whats its worth I have expressed similar concerns directly to MS on many of the issues raised especially the future direction of SQL Server, ADPs and Access. But you need to be a rela big name int he developer world to get heard properly. Martin Quoting Francisco H Tapia <my.lists at verizon.net>: > AFAIK, MS never claimed for Sql Server or MSDE to be > 'maintenance-free', and they 'are' easier to use when compared to > Oracle or DB2, and for that matter even mySQL. While all engines, are > simple and straightforward, (after you > read the documentation) they all have their own level of complexity. > JET, > for example crumbles under the load of Memo fields. There is also 0 > recoverability from a damaged .mdb file, if you MDB gets corrupt and the > MS > tools can't fix it, you are generally dead in the water. Sql Server > and other big brand engines provide for up to the point of failure > recoverability. In order to use SqlServer or MSDE it does involve a > great > deal of learning the product, but I think it's just the same as when we > all > started down the road with JET. > > -Francisco > http://rcm.netfirms.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charlotte Foust" <cfoust at infostatsystems.com> > To: <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 8:27 AM > Subject: RE: [AccessD] .net > > > : Unless common sense rears its ugly head somewhere along the way. SQL > : Server and the desktop engine are not the maintenance free, > easy-to-use > : creatures that MS claims. At least Jet got the job done without > needing > : a dba on tap. > : > : Charlotte Foust > : > : -----Original Message----- > : From: Martin Reid [mailto:mwp.reid at Queens-Belfast.AC.UK] > : Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 7:33 AM > : To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com > : Subject: Re: [AccessD] .net > : > : > : I think the true future of Access will not be really known > : until Access 12 is available. I do know JET and DAO are > : dead today. No further development of either AFAIK. Could > : all change but we have to wait and see. > : > : Lot of confusion it would appear > : > : Martin > : > : Martin WP Reid > : Information Services > : Queens University Belfast > : > : Tel: (02890) 273750 > : > : > : ---------------------- > : > : > : _______________________________________________ > : AccessD mailing list > : AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > : http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > : Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > : _______________________________________________ > : AccessD mailing list > : AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > : http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > : Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > : > > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com