what is the best order to do the mcsa?

bjh23

i'm starting with the 70-210 and am almost ready to take it. what should i study for next, 70-215 or 70-218? does it really even matter? i want to finish off my mcsa with the security+ and upgrade it to win2k3 with the 70-292 as well, but was going to wait on those until i got the first 3 out of the way. any suggestions?

janmike

This is pretty well my plan as well.

Seems the natural migration on MCSA is 70-210, 70-215, and 70-218 last.

It's logical. Do the workstation then study the server OS along with the desktop on a network, then study the whole infrastructure as a unit with 70-218. If you do it right, I think that you'll be pretty well prepared for the 70-218 by time you finish 70-210 & 70-215.

Best of luck!

JOblessELement

How about, instead, just heading for an MCSA 2003 on 210/270(2K/XP) followed by 70-201, 70-291(Server, Network)? In that way, you save fees on an exam (considering you don't fail any of these above

I'm gonna take the 270 in a few days and then move on to taking the 290 next.

Lexxdymondz

I personally did A+>Net+>210>215>218 for mine.

halflife78

I am doing Network+ now and A+ next before I start school this summer. My school classes will path me through 70-290, 70-291, and 70-270 for my MCSA 2003

pandimus

Personally... Ive been doing some job huntin. and It seems to me that the employer's love to see the cisco stuff on your resume. Matter of fact I dont have any cisco on my resume and one employer looked at my resume and blatently asked me What about cisco? If i was to do it over again, i would go, A+, NEt+, CCNA, MCSA, MCSE.. I would probably even drop the SEC+, cuz that sucker is too unreasonable to me.. But now that ive failed it 2 times, SEC+ is moby dick....

bjh23

i'm currently taking classes at a community college that cover the win2k suite so that's why i'm doing that instead of jumping directly to 2k3. plus, it's nice to have diversity on the resume. anyway, thanks for your guys' responses. i'll keep plodding along...

JOblessELement

bjh23 wrote:

i'm currently taking classes at a community college that cover the win2k suite

Not a bad choice as Win2k3 hasn't really had a chance to mature and it hasn't been out long enough for current companies to move to it as yet. The handful working for newer companies might be exposed to 2k3 ... like me

janmike

JOblessELement wrote:

Win2k3 hasn't really had a chance to mature and it hasn't been out long enough for current companies to move to it

Believe this is correct.

I work in a data center with 3 rows of server racks(lots of 'em!).
We still use NT4, UNIX, NetWare with w95 clients, Windows 3.11 along with W2k servers and W2k Professional workstations. I don't look for any of that to change. As far as I have been able to see, there's not one W2003 manual in the place--it's all W2k, NT4, etc. manuals, training materials, and resource kits. And, everyone is very comfortable with these systems. So, I'm going ahead with W2k and then maybe upgrade to W2003.

There is talk of a new data center 3 years down the road, so maybe then W2003 will be deployed. But, IMHO, deployment of a whole new system in a huge data center is too expensive for even the hugest to jump into immediately(although we're certainly not a "hugest").

Just the way I see it. Good luck to all on your decisions.

2lazybutsmart

Yeah I also think when it comes to jobs, people certified in win2k will get first priority. Companies who'll hire win2k3 certified techies will most probably do that only if they wish to migrate to win2k3. But I'm starting to feel that many companies will stay with win2k for a long long time.

There's not a single talk about win2k3 migration in my company; that's one thing I know for sure. And the same will apply to many other companies who've put a considerable amout of money in setting up a win2k network.

2lbs.

halflife78

No choice for me really, I have to do the 2003 track. All of the classes for my degree have been upgraded to the 2003 track for this coming semester.