Microsoft expanding XPs life... more and more

undomiel

Personally I don't see what all the fuss is about. You point, you click, things react (or sometimes don't).

HeroPsycho

Jordus wrote: »

I laugh in the face of anyone who thinks learning/getting certed on Vista is a waste of time.

Microsofts technologies are progressive and there was a LOT of stuff in Vista that will be directly in or evolve slightly in Windows 7.

The ignorant IT Pros that ignored Vista will likely be unprepared when it comes to supporting Windows 7 and later versions.

I have the MCITP:EST cred, and dont regret it ONE bit. I will simply upgrade it when the time comes, and it will be easier because I am already well versed on the technologies that will be included in Windows 7.

...

They havnt lost value because those certed on Vista know technology that will be more relevant in the near future than those certed on XP.

The features and technology in Vist will contiune to progress and grow in 7, and being 2 steps behind everyone else in trying to learn that is only going to hurt, not help.

One doesnt necessarily have to be CERTED in vista, but knowing it is beneficial.

I read these entire posts. I don't see a single qualifier that says you only meant Windows techs need to learn Windows Vista until after I said not everyone needs to be certified or needs to learn it. You said IT Pros in general, en masse, up to that point.

You also seem to think that people's jobs are stamped "Windows tech", and their roles aren't broader than desktop support, or they're not trying to advance their careers to being an admin or engineer.

If I'm what you'd deem a "Windows tech", I might be trying to be an admin or an engineer. Maybe my users also use Outlook plugged into Exchange Server, so I'm trying to learn Exchange instead of Vista. This again may rightfully steer me into learning something other than Vista, and there's not a single thing wrong with that. You *might* be able to solve a pure Windows Vista problem, but I in that case might be able to solve more problems in the end because I'm learning how Outlook and Exchange Server works in that case.

There's enough gray area in those scenarios to say definitely that even your lately revised point that every "Windows tech" is ignorant should they choose to not learn Vista is itself arrogant and misguided on your part.

I seriously don't understand why you're being so unbelievably belligerent and hostile, and asserting you're the definitive authority on what "Windows techs"/IT Professionals should learn, and trashing this guy's MCDST cert.

Jordus

msteinhilber wrote: »

He didn't use certified in his response, he said learn. I think he did read your post, or he would continue to insist that you are saying everybody should certify in Vista - but he didn't, he argued they do not need to learn Vista if they do not have a need to.

I've been in job sites for my side biz that are strictly XP shops, some maybe with some 2000 clients. For a person in that role, they are just as proficient of a Windows tech even if they were unaware of Vista's existence. For regular job, we are in an environment where our real estate agents often bring their own machines so we have exposure to 2000/XP/Vista. In my case, it makes sense to know about Vista fairly well since I am exposed to it. It does in the end all come down to what you support, not being aware of what you do not support does not make you a bad tech, it just makes you a tech who is not trained in technologies that they do not support at all.

Well im certainly glad that you guys are the type that dont want to learn one tiny bit of information past what will make you a dollar.

I certainly am in this profession first because I love to do it, so I'll learn whatever i can get my hands on.

If you guys honestly feel like you have no reason to learn anything until after your employer needs you to know it, then I feel sorry for you. I also wouldnt want any of you to work for/with me.

I recently got promoted to doing a job that most people my age do not get to do, simply because I have learned skills that did not pertain to my old job, but were in demand for the company.

Also, when I deployed that 500 Vista machine site...had I not known Vista BEFORE that, it would not have happened. Because noone else had yet taken the time to learn the differences in deployment in Vista. And no, you cant tell me that someone who has sysprep'd XP 1,000,000 times can sit down and make a very well working vista unattend image in an extremely short amount of time, because the technologies are vastly different.

Jordus

HeroPsycho wrote: »

I seriously don't understand why you're being so unbelievably belligerent and hostile, and asserting you're the definitive authority on what "Windows techs"/IT Professionals should learn, and trashing this guy's MCDST cert.

and when did i say i was an authority? I said MY OPNION many times.

If you dont like it, dont read it, and surely dont reply to it.

Seems like you are the pot trying to call the kettle black, when really you are the blacker of the two.

Let me make it simple for you.

If you support WINDOWS and do not LEARN VISTA you will be LESS PREPARED for windows 7 than someone who DID, and thats a poor choice. MY OPINION!

HeroPsycho

Jordus wrote: »

Well im certainly glad that you guys are the type that dont want to learn one tiny bit of information past what will make you a dollar.

I certainly am in this profession first because I love to do it, so I'll learn whatever i can get my hands on.

If you guys honestly feel like you have no reason to learn anything until after your employer needs you to know it, then I feel sorry for you. I also wouldnt want any of you to work for/with me.

A. Why is learning Vista valuable and anything else I choose to learn instead like PowerShell, Exchange, ISA, VMware, SANs, Storage, firewalls not? It doesn't count in your book? And it's bad because those skills raise my earning power because...?
B. I like learning things other than desktop OS's. Does that make me a bad IT Pro just because it apparently isn't on your list of approved learning subjects?
C. I would never be working with/for you. We're not peers. Stop talking like we are, or you're my superior. You're not.

Edit: Large fonts means this debate is over. LOL!

Jordus

HeroPsycho wrote: »

A. Why is learning Vista valuable and anything else I choose to learn instead like PowerShell, Exchange, ISA, VMware, SANs, Storage, firewalls not? It doesn't count in your book?
B. I like learning things other than desktop OS's. Does that make me a bad IT Pro just because it apparently isn't on your list of approved learning subjects?
C. I would never be working with/for you. We're not peers. Stop talking like we are, or you're my superior. You're not.

A. I never said it was valuable to YOU. I said it shoudl be valuable to someone who supports Windows systems. If you work eclusively with Windows SERVER then it probably wont affect you. In the same respect if you skipped every other Server version to learn, i would also think (IN MY OPINION) that it is a poor choice.

B. Learn whatever you want, but if you only learn every fifth iteration of a technology you need to know then IN MY OPNION that makes you a bad IT pro.

C. Im glad you wouldnt be working with me, you obviously place little value on self-worth but rather what you can use to worm money out of an employer . Im also not talking like your superior, so shut up with that stupid sh**.

This is a retarded discussion. Go keep yourself up to date with technologies on a 5 year rotation and get passed over for jobs and promotions, see if I care.

dynamik

HeroPsycho, unless you use all caps in a bold, red font that's underlined and concludes with a cacophony of exclamation points, I'm afraid he's got you beat.

msteinhilber

Jordus wrote: »

Well im certainly glad that you guys are the type that dont want to learn one tiny bit of information past what will make you a dollar.

And you accuse HerePsycho of not reading your posts? I clearly said that my regular job I deal with Vista a fair amount since agents of ours bring their own machines often, so I know quite a bit about Vista - I'm actually sitting 70-620 in a week and a half, and 624 shortly after (because 624 makes sense in my environment).

Jordus wrote:

If you guys honestly feel like you have no reason to learn anything until after your employer needs you to know it, then I feel sorry for you. I also wouldnt want any of you to work for/with me.

All that is being argued here is that it makes the most sense to focus studies on what they actually work with. But I doubt me saying this considering a couple others have will make a difference in what you think of us.

Jordus wrote:

I recently got promoted to doing a job that most people my age do not get to do, simply because I have learned skills that did not pertain to my old job, but were in demand for the company.

Congrats, sincerely. But I would very very strongly suggest taking some time to re-evaluate your attitude. Because if you conduct yourself in the professional world similar to the way you conduct yourself on these forums, then your promotions will be rare. If you expressed yourself in this manner in my shop, you'd most certainly be placed on a performance improvement plan and eventually let go if you did not change.

Jordus wrote:

Also, when I deployed that 500 Vista machine site...had I not known Vista BEFORE that, it would not have happened. Because noone else had yet taken the time to learn the differences in deployment in Vista. And no, you cant tell me that someone who has sysprep'd XP 1,000,000 times can sit down and make a very well working vista unattend image in an extremely short amount of time, because the technologies are vastly different.

It's really a matter of personal skill level, many people who have been in the industry long enough develop a good feel for how technology will work and usually after a quick read of some basic documentation, they can work with it very easily. On the other hand, I know people in the industry with many years of experience that still require a lot of hands-on before they really get a good grasp - it all depends on the person.


If I can just point out one thing. You and I have had our own little spat in a thread that was taken to private message. You were very stubborn and unable to see other viewpoints than your own, just really bad tunnel vision really. I'm just wondering if you are aware of this... because you come off this way in a great deal of your threads, and it's not a very likable quality.

msteinhilber

Jordus wrote: »

.... Im also not talking like your superior, so shut up with that stupid sh**....

I think somebody has a bad case of the Mondays!!!

You are SUCH a professional.

Jordus

dynamik wrote: »

HeroPsycho, unless you use all caps in a bold, red font that's underlined and concludes with a cacophony of exclamation points, I'm afraid he's got you beat.

I prefer to have discussions with people who can read.

I cant count the number of times i said "my opinion" yet he continues to think im trying to come across as a SME on this.

If people cant even understand basic concepts in a discussion, then it isnt worth my time to have that discussion.

I'm done with this ignorant thread and the obvious hipocracy that consumes Psycho's arguments.

dynamik

Why isn't he equally free to state his opinion?

I don't take him seriously. Why do you?

HeroPsycho

Jordus wrote: »

Im glad you wouldnt be working with me, you obviously place little value on self-worth but rather what you can use to worm money out of an employer . Im also not talking like your superior, so shut up with that stupid sh**.

Developing skills that have more earning power isn't worming money out of an employer. It's called "career advancement". If you're happy where you are, there's nothing wrong with that. There's also nothing wrong with growing yourself professionally, and not just in technological knowledge and skill. Some might say that's a good thing to strive for.

Suggesting we might work with each other or I'd work for you suggests we're on even keel or I'm beneath you. I'm neither. Probably because I value career advancement...

HeroPsycho

Jordus wrote: »

I cant count the number of times i said "my opinion" yet he continues to think im trying to come across as a SME on this.

You mean like...

"The ignorant IT Pros that ignored Vista will likely be unprepared when it comes to supporting Windows 7 and later versions."

"Anyone who makes the (bad) judgement of totally skipping a technology to learn is hindering their ability to pick up the next generation more quickly."

"I said it would be ignorant to not atleast LEARN it."

"you obviously place little value on self-worth but rather what you can use to worm money out of an employer ."

networker050184

Guess I better go out and learn Vista so I'm not labeled ignorant!

HeroPsycho

networker050184 wrote: »

Guess I better go out and learn Vista so I'm not labeled ignorant!

Don't forget, you should never do that if it furthers your career though because you will have little self-worth....

someeh

lol....

In my work environment, there is no need to run Vista. We have 1-2 Vista machines and that's about it. We have mostly legacy software running on our servers, so for us to run Vista is pointless unless we upgrade the software which requires $$$. At this point of time if the job you're currently in has no need for Vista, there is no mandatory requirement to learn vista, so I don't believe that makes you a bad tech. On a side note! it would help your skills and knowledge if you did know. But I don't think it would help you advance in your job if you don't run Vista.
Does that make me ignorant? lol
I'm sure companies have more important development tasks in mind for their servers, network infrastructure, or whatever network applications they run.
You remind me of my co worker that works in IS... he always has to have the latest and greatest and brags.
Jryantech!!! if you feel it benefits you and your future path, by all means go for it. I'm sure alot of companies aren't making the move to Vista.
Vista might work well with others, I on the other hand have had bad experiences with it when I had it installed on my job PC. But like i said... we run some legacy software but not up to date with Vista's standards.

Webmaster

jryantech wrote: »

Where are the Extreme Left-Wing Mac users at??

They're too busy being productive on their stable computers

Seriously though, please keep it friendly and at least professional guys. At some point you may just have to agree to disagree, no shame in that. Unlike in personal attacks towards other members.

As I and others mentioned in these forums before, please stick to discussing the topic not other posters.

If anyone has anything to add please let it be a proper contribution to the initial post of this thread so I won't have to lock this topic.

HeroPsycho

Webmaster wrote: »

They're too busy being productive on their stable computers

You can be productive on a Mac?!

Webmaster

HeroPsycho wrote: »

You can be productive on a Mac?!

Oh no... don't get me started I'd go on-and-on-and-on about my first Mac, a Mac Mini, that I bought last year, after 2 decades of using Microsoft operating systems, heck being a fan even, and that aside from some mandatory reboots after updates it has been up for 6 months, that I had Xcode (the downright awesome development suite that comes 'free' with Mac OS X) hang once for about 30 seconds and apart from that it always just works, and a lot more responsive with only 1 GB ram. I'd also brag a little about how well it does as a media center on my 32inch monitor (=TV). I'd shamelessly leave out how annoying the differences in shortkeys for cut, copy, and paste are (especially if you're using VNC on a Windows computer and need to use the ALT to send the 'command' key), that some apps I need and games I want simply don't run on Macs, that it might just be luck I got one out of a good batch, and that I just can't do without a Windows OS. No, no, let's safe that for another day.

LBC90805

dynamik wrote: »

I work with a decent number of Vista machines, and I don't have any bad feelings about getting my Vista cert.

I think it's fairly typical for company's to upgrade every-other release. There are a lot of other costs, such as training and education, in addition to the cost of the software itself. This doesn't seem like anything out of the ordinary.

Depending on how big the organization is and how much money they have thrown at developing applications for a specific Operating System, such as XP in this case. It would be silly to keep on developing new versions of software for newer versions of operating systems when they come out when the previous one works just fine. One of the big reasons we are still using Terminal Emulators, because the front end and back ends of those systems work just fine.

There are a few Vista machines in the place where I work, but not too many because most folks need to run mission critical applications on XP.

sprkymrk

jryantech wrote: »

I am not certified in Vista but I would like to know if you are.. And if you are how has it helped you and are you currently in a position supporting Vista?

Nope, and probably won't. It hasn't hurt/helped either way.

I don't know of any "bugs" with Vista, but UAC is annoying and IMO doesn't add to security. The only issue I have is that GPMC takes like 10x longer to pull up from my Vista workstation than it does on my XP workstation.

In the DoD (Army at least) they kept NT4 and W98 until W2KSP2 was available. Even at that, they only upgraded workstations and member servers. It wasn't until W2K3 came out that they upgraded the DC's and migrated to AD. I think we kept our W2K workstations until XPSP2 was out. We are just now rolling out Vista, and not en masse, but rather on a maintenence rotation (as people get a new PC they get Vista).

rwwest7

sprkymrk wrote: »

Nope, and probably won't. It hasn't hurt/helped either way.

I don't know of any "bugs" with Vista, but UAC is annoying and IMO doesn't add to security. The only issue I have is that GPMC takes like 10x longer to pull up from my Vista workstation than it does on my XP workstation.

UAC does add to security. Something can't be installed in the background (a virus) without you knowing and giving it permission. It's an idea stolen from Linux, but it's a good idea.

AD Users and Computers works much, much, much faster from Vista then XP. GPMC run fine for me, and from Vista you can apply a lot more settings with Client Side extensions installed.

All the people who bad mouth Vista do so out of ignorance, IMO.

dynamik

rwwest7 wrote: »

UAC does add to security. Something can't be installed in the background (a virus) without you knowing and giving it permission. It's an idea stolen from Linux, but it's a good idea.

I think the point he was making is that it is so irritating, people just click it out of habit and don't really think about why. In some circumstances, it goes too far, and that leads to simply clicking ok out of habit, which ultimately circumvents its benefits. For example, you're required to run cmd as an administrator to do an ipconfig /release. I'm looking forward to being able to adjust the level of UAC in Windows 7.

sprkymrk

rwwest7 wrote: »

UAC does add to security. Something can't be installed in the background (a virus) without you knowing and giving it permission. It's an idea stolen from Linux, but it's a good idea.

In addition to what dynamik said, in my environment (which I admit influences my opinion of UAC) no one runs with admin priveledges anyway, so a background install of a virus couldn't happen anyway in most cases. If you run with admin rights all day long, then something will get you with or without UAC eventually. Give me an example of how they stole this idea from linux. If you mean "su" or "sudo" I would disagree, they are more akin to "runas" (which Microsoft did steal from linux).

rwwest7 wrote: »

AD Users and Computers works much, much, much faster from Vista then XP. GPMC run fine for me, and from Vista you can apply a lot more settings with Client Side extensions installed.

No difference in ADUC for me. Yes, you can access more Group Policy settings from a Vista GPMC, I never said you couldn't. I was merely pointing out what I had so far experienced on my Vista workstation as compared to my XP machine.

rwwest7 wrote: »

All the people who bad mouth Vista do so out of ignorance, IMO.

I am not sure if you are accusing me of bad mouthing Vista, or just throwing a random comment out there. I suppose if you have personally experienced every problem all people have had with Vista and been able to fix it in their environment, then I will agree with your opinion. Otherwise I would have to say that Vista, like any OS, has enough short comings to be worthy of some bad mouthing.

dynamik

I think the manner in which UAC was implemented was "borrowed" from OSX, if anything...

Jordus

dynamik wrote: »

I think the manner in which UAC was implemented was "borrowed" from OSX, if anything...

Well im sure you know that Sudo didnt start in OSX, as well


Anyway, Let me give an apology to any of those I pissed off last night. It w as late, I was grumpy and I dont think i expressed myself exactly how I intended (or should have).

Everyone has their own paths for theirself in every walk of life, and I certainly am not here to tell anyone how to walk the walk.

So, to answer the OP. I think my Vista certs are plenty worth it. Its "one more thing" that employers will know im qualified to work on. Infact i saw 3 job listings today that said something along the lines of "XP experience a plus, but Vista experience preferred". I suppose it just all depends on the company.

rwwest7

dynamik wrote: »

I think the manner in which UAC was implemented was "borrowed" from OSX, if anything...

I was thinking of Fedora Core, which prompts for the root password before you can do a lot of the administrative tasks.