Is it just me?

So far the 70-290 seems quite a bit more straightforward and easier than the 70-270. Does anybody else here think so? Or am I just missing something?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Slowhand

The 70-290 is pretty straightforward, whereas the 70-270 exam covers Windows XP Pro and how it interacts with Windows Server 2003. I think that may be part of why 70-290 seems "easier", since it covers essentially one operating system.

M4verick

Yeah, I'm feeling pretty confident with it so far. So I've scheduled my test for 9/26/08. That should give me enough time to finish up my studying and then some. Depending on how I feel for the Server+ I want to take that the same day...But at the moment, I'm not that comfortable with that material.

Technowiz

I found the 270 to be much harder than the 290.

dynamik

It makes sense if you think about it. There's only one XP exam (excluding other tracks like MCDST), and there's multiple server exams. That's a lot of content to cram into one exam.

Metaldave

Have to agree, 270 was far harder than 290. When you look at the other 2003 exams, 291 for example, it takes the hardness biscuit right back for 270

undomiel

270 was arguably the most difficult Microsoft exam I took. 294 may rival it but for different reasons. The 270 is also the only Microsoft exam that made me feel hopeless a few questions in just like the Security+ did. The 290 is the easiest exam I took though, hands down.

haftap00p

undomiel wrote:

The 270 is also the only Microsoft exam that made me feel hopeless a few questions in just like the Security+ did.

That sums it up pretty well. After about 10 questions of the 270, it felt like a black cloud was coming in over top of me.

And of course I failed it the first trip around.