Preplogic is junk

JammywanksJammywanks Posts: 127Member
I'm trying to take the exam simulators on this, and they only accept unabreviated commands, like you can't type "int" you have to type "interface". But this isn't my main point.

So then you want to configure terminal, aka type in "config t". And it works! What? Ok so I can abbreviate terminal by using 't'? So why not just make us say "config terminal"?

Oh wait. I'm still not done with my rant. So then it gets to access lists, and you might say access-list 101 etc etc, eq 80.
Wait. You can't say 80. You have to say "www". Ok, but don't both 80 and www work on a real router? I'm sure it does, but to PrepLogic it doesn't.

I'm up to this part of access list implementation, and I already created an access list, and now if I type in "int fa0/0" that won't work of course. So then I say "Router(config)#interface fastethernet 0/0"... NO. This does not go into the simulator. I try "interface fastethernet0/0" (no space before 0/0). NO. This doens't work . How about "interface e0/0". Um, well show run exibits show all ethernet interfaces as "fastEthernet". So basically their simulators SUCK, and you can't even type in the same commands as you do on a real router.

Edit: Upon showing answers, I was right up to the point where I was struggling to change to interface fastethernet 0/0. Apparantly you have to say "show access-lists" BEFORE you type interface fastethernet 0/0 but the question NEVER specified that I had to confirm that the access-list was created. Only then can you go into your interfaces after show access-list. So its technically 100% wrong to not to check your access-list?

Point being, Prep Logic sucks at making exams, and I advise nobody to buy them. Has anyone else used Preplogic before? What do you think? I'm spending more time trying to figure out THEIR CLI command set that is different than one on a cisco router. I'm afraid I might fail the exam because of their material.
CCNA Lab: Two 1720's, one 2520, two 2924XL switches
[IPCop box] PIII 1GHz | 512MB RAM | 1 Gig Compact Flash HD
Errors in your CCNA text book? Never mind, the authors don't care.

Comments

  • TregTreg Posts: 79Member ■■□□□□□□□□
    I havent used preplogic for CCNA so I cant review it.

    How ever I did use preplogic for a 70-270 exam and found it ok.
    I purchased another Preplogic for 70-290 and did not like it.

    Ever since I have been purchasing the Transcender exam because of the included simulations and have found that the question formats are of much higher quality. It is more expensive, but highly worth it. I will continue to purchase Transcender exams for every other exam I take unless I hear a bad review.
  • sprkymrksprkymrk Posts: 4,884Member ■■■□□□□□□□
    Before you go on about how bad they are, did you speak to a customer service rep from Prep Logic? Most folks I know seem to like their stuff.
    All things are possible, only believe.
  • Aquabat [banned]Aquabat [banned] Posts: 299Inactive Imported Users
    yes they do suck, but nothing sux more than... Boson NetSim
    i herd u leik mudkips lol
  • WebmasterWebmaster Posts: 10,292Admin Admin
    PrepLogic is one of the better practice test providers and one of the few clean ones left, though just like the competition it differs per exam. Regardless of whether it's an advertiser/sponsor of TechExams.net, if you have anything to complain about a company, keep it realistic rather than trashing them.

    You obviously got disappointed because you are comparing practice exams to a full-blown simulator or the real thing even, which is an unrealistic comparison. Take all the practice questions, read the explanations and references and you'll get them most out of their practice exams. For practicing commands and cisco configuration you need a good sim or a real Cisco device.
  • JammywanksJammywanks Posts: 127Member
    Ok fine. You guys have a point. Maybe I blew up a little bit back there. I will look into this issue on my own time rather than vent on here. icon_redface.gif Take care
    CCNA Lab: Two 1720's, one 2520, two 2924XL switches
    [IPCop box] PIII 1GHz | 512MB RAM | 1 Gig Compact Flash HD
    Errors in your CCNA text book? Never mind, the authors don't care.
  • sprkymrksprkymrk Posts: 4,884Member ■■■□□□□□□□
    Reviews are more than welcome, but as Webmaster stated just list the pros and cons, or give them a 1-10 rating, or thumbs up/down. If nothing else it makes you more believeable. Others can then decide whether or not to try the product based on your review.

    I have to mention though that the Bosun sim made me as angry as the PL sim apparently made you. icon_lol.gif
    All things are possible, only believe.
  • JammywanksJammywanks Posts: 127Member
    Yeah, I guess this is where the line is drawn of the differences between buying a real router lab and buying sims... Like we all have heard and said before, a sim is nothing like the real thing bowing.gif
    CCNA Lab: Two 1720's, one 2520, two 2924XL switches
    [IPCop box] PIII 1GHz | 512MB RAM | 1 Gig Compact Flash HD
    Errors in your CCNA text book? Never mind, the authors don't care.
  • JammywanksJammywanks Posts: 127Member
    sprkymrk wrote:
    I have to mention though that the Bosun sim made me as angry as the PL sim apparently made you. icon_lol.gif
    Then this raises another question, how are the sims in the actual 640-801 exam? Are they just as flaky? This is what scares me.
    CCNA Lab: Two 1720's, one 2520, two 2924XL switches
    [IPCop box] PIII 1GHz | 512MB RAM | 1 Gig Compact Flash HD
    Errors in your CCNA text book? Never mind, the authors don't care.
  • sprkymrksprkymrk Posts: 4,884Member ■■■□□□□□□□
    Jammywanks wrote:
    sprkymrk wrote:
    I have to mention though that the Bosun sim made me as angry as the PL sim apparently made you. icon_lol.gif
    Then this raises another question, how are the sims in the actual 640-801 exam? Are they just as flaky? This is what scares me.

    Yes, I remember getting frustrated on an actual sim on the exam because I knew I was doing it right, I just wasn't doing it the way they apparently thought I should.
    All things are possible, only believe.
  • JammywanksJammywanks Posts: 127Member
    I see then. If I could just ask you, without me asking too deep into getting a free answer from the exam, but just what were their differences? Was it the difference of eq 80 or eq www? Or not using abbreviation vs. only abbreviated commands would work?
    CCNA Lab: Two 1720's, one 2520, two 2924XL switches
    [IPCop box] PIII 1GHz | 512MB RAM | 1 Gig Compact Flash HD
    Errors in your CCNA text book? Never mind, the authors don't care.
  • KaminskyKaminsky Posts: 1,235Member
    Aquabat wrote:
    yes they do suck, but nothing sux more than... Boson NetSim

    sprkymrk wrote:
    I have to mention though that the Bosun sim made me as angry as the PL sim apparently made you. icon_lol.gif

    Inc wrote:
    In Thread - "Passed with 987"

    * Dynamips (essential for passing if no access to real equipment available)


    So how would folks who have tried both rate Dynamips vs Bosun ?


    ps: yes, yes, yes real equipment is best. We all know that.
    Kam.
  • sprkymrksprkymrk Posts: 4,884Member ■■■□□□□□□□
    Jammywanks wrote:
    I see then. If I could just ask you, without me asking too deep into getting a free answer from the exam, but just what were their differences? Was it the difference of eq 80 or eq www? Or not using abbreviation vs. only abbreviated commands would work?

    I think it had more to do with not typing a complete command, as you experienced in your sim software. The reason I think that's what it was is because I remember the stupid message invalid character or command detected at ^ message. The carot ^ symbol was completely throwing me because I tried every iteration of the command I could think. I finally hit on the right way after wasting about 10 minutes and couldn't help thinking how stupid that was of Cisco to mess with my mind like that. icon_lol.gif
    All things are possible, only believe.
  • JammywanksJammywanks Posts: 127Member
    Okay then. I will try to adapt to as many simulators as possible icon_confused.gif

    As far as Boson Vs. Dynamips, well Dynamips is harder to setup. There is no getting it to work out of the box. Also you need to have full IOS images of at least 3640 series routers as a minimum. Although later versions may support 2900's. Last but not least, the hardware requirements are somewhat heavy depending on your lab setup.

    Also there is a java client somewhere around that connects to a main server hosting a small dynamips lab of 3 to 4 3640's. This is what could be a real problem to boson and the like if they made functional lab and questionaire systems under dynamips.

    Not that I care icon_rolleyes.gif
    CCNA Lab: Two 1720's, one 2520, two 2924XL switches
    [IPCop box] PIII 1GHz | 512MB RAM | 1 Gig Compact Flash HD
    Errors in your CCNA text book? Never mind, the authors don't care.
Sign In or Register to comment.