New Transcender Program

NPA24

Has anyone bought the new Transcender? If you have, can you give your review on this thread. I did download the demo and it is totally different from the old format. I was wondering if anyone has used this new Transcender in preparing for any exams because I'm considering purchasing one for the 70-210.

Orion82698

I just got it as of Monday. It has change, but still just as good. The questions are difficult, and worded to Microsoft standard.

NPA24

The exams before were already harder. I guess it's a good thing, it will make you know the material better. Thanks for the info.

tschnabel99

I bought the test for 70-218. This is my 4th Trascender AND LAST!. These exams suck. They are way more difficult than they need to be to pass. No simple expanations of wrong answers just a long drawn out diatribe by some techie geek f____. I'm a geek to but prefer simple. The interface on the new test is bad. I'm not wasting my time with it. Maybe for flash only cus that's all its good for. DON'T BUY IT FOR GOSH SAKE. I can test in the 80% range on other demos. This things history track feature bites. If there is a demo try it. If you want more info about how saitsfied I am with the: Difficulty of the Questions ; Interface Design; Tracking feature; or any of the other compaints post yer email here pard. BTW I'm liking the Ucertify demo..........have others to rate too....

Orion82698

LMAO.....

Yeah, the wording does really suck. I got stuck for over 10 minutes on a questions that had a horrible description. I know what it was asking me, but I thought it was trying to trick me. I wouldn't say this will be my last, a lot of the other practice exams that I have test and seen aren't as good, or have simular problems. A buddy of mine took the Sec+ with Boson and I didn't like it at all.

Jerz

Well based on my experience with Transcender the questions were harder for tests 271, 272 and 270 but for 290 and 291 they seemed much easier. Actually IMHO the Measureup questions that come with the press books are much harder. All in all though I do like Transcender...

Edit: The long drawn out answers and reasoning Transcender gives for the answer is what sets it apart from Measureup and Preplogic IMHO. Nothing worse than getting a question wrong and not knowing why.

Drakonblayde

The fact that Transcender *is* harder than the real thing is a *good* thing. If you can pass the Transcenders it means you're more than ready for the real thing... It's what I always use to check myself before I go take an exam.

tschnabel99

EAMPLE:

A question I just read was about a "WINS" client in a non routed network.
Q: How does a WINS client resolve names if it is not using WINS to resolve names.

For figging cris sake..................IF ITS NOT USING WINS THEN ITS NOT A WINS CLIENT JEENYUS

ANOTHER ONE:
All services and applications were migrated to the new serv. now clients can't resolve names. WELL WHAT SERVICES AND WHAT APPS? WAS IT DNS? WINS? DHCP? STATIC? DYNAMIC? AD.....................LIKE JOHN STOSSEL SAYS.............GIMME A BREAK

I could come up with more example but that would mean I'd have to look at that god awful program again..................going to call transcender now.

NPA24

I guess I won't be getting the new updated transcenders then. Thanks for the review. Is there anyone else out there that has bought the new transcenders?

tschnabel99

I just bought the Preplogic exam for $79 and I'll let you know how I like it. Ucertify has theirs on sale for $59. Buying these two or buying a downloaded PDF might be good too. I kinda like those since I have my choice of study materials and my test LAN I don't rely on the tests for knowledge really just an environment to test in. Thats why I like my answers explained simply and clearly so I can go work on them instead of having to try to figure out what they are saying.

tschnabel99

Oh and as a side note you knew that Transcender was bought out right? So maybe this is the new vendors program with Transcenders label. I used to be sold on them.

/usr

The fact that Transcender *is* harder than the real thing is a *good* thing.

Precisely what I was going to say. I've never used Transcenders because other products have served me just fine, but if I had to choose, I would want something harder than the actual exam. Keep in mind that these tools also teach you the material. By making the questions difficult, you're forced to actually think about things, not simply repeat answers you read from a book.

However, if the questions are poorly worded, then that's completely different. I went through the same thing with Boson's CEH practice test.

Drakonblayde

tschnabel99 wrote:

EAMPLE:

A question I just read was about a "WINS" client in a non routed network.
Q: How does a WINS client resolve names if it is not using WINS to resolve names.

For figging cris sake..................IF ITS NOT USING WINS THEN ITS NOT A WINS CLIENT JEENYUS

ANOTHER ONE:
All services and applications were migrated to the new serv. now clients can't resolve names. WELL WHAT SERVICES AND WHAT APPS? WAS IT DNS? WINS? DHCP? STATIC? DYNAMIC? AD.....................LIKE JOHN STOSSEL SAYS.............GIMME A BREAK

I could come up with more example but that would mean I'd have to look at that god awful program again..................going to call transcender now.

LOL, man, I've seen questions like that on Microsoft exams, so I still don't see what you're complaining about (judging by the exams you've got listed, you should know that).

As to the first one, well, if a client could use WINS but is using something else to resolve, that doesn't really make it a non WINS client, it's still got the capability. I'd assume the answer in that case would be DNS or host files.

As for the second question, well, those are the things you're supposed to think and then reason out what's correct from the available answers.

I dunno though, I don't plan on taking anymore Microsoft exams, but I'm planning to pick up Transcender for BSCI in a couple weeks, I'll see how bad it is for myself I guess

TranscenderMichael

Okay, okay, I'm here. I'm a developer for Transcender - I'm the techie geek ____, as TSchnabel99 so eloquently put it, who writes the content for many of our products. Now if you have any Transcender questions, I'll be around to answer.

Drakonblayde's nailed the answer, in this case. We try to make the questions at least as difficult as you'll find on the exam. Additionally, we try to teach you the concepts you'll need to know to pass. And we attempt to explain the concepts in such a way that you'll know what they're talking about when you see a question regarding that concept on the live exam. That's why the explanations are so long - ANYTHING in the explanations is fair game on the live exam.

If you want a product or **** that tells you the only bare minimum, or merely gives you a bunch of questions and answers with no explanations of why the right answer is right and the wrong answers are wrong, be my guest. However, if you want to truly understand the concept, purchase a product that teaches it to you. It is my opinion that our product does so.

The new engine is just that - a brand new testing engine that we developed at the end of last year and recently released. The content is the same as it ever was... but the wrapper it comes in is somewhat different, and it provides increased functionality. Best of all, you don't have to download 4 separate engines when you buy 4 products... you download 1 engine with 4 sets of questions.

Hope this helps. Please let me know if I can provide any assistance or advice.

Drakonblayde

TranscenderMichael wrote:

Drakonblayde's nailed the answer, in this case. We try to make the questions at least as difficult as you'll find on the exam. Additionally, we try to teach you the concepts you'll need to know to pass. And we attempt to explain the concepts in such a way that you'll know what they're talking about when you see a question regarding that concept on the live exam. That's why the explanations are so long - ANYTHING in the explanations is fair game on the live exam.

And that's what I love about the engine. I'm told what the proper answer is and *why* it's the proper answer, with a reference (and usually multiple references) to back it up just in case I don't believe it. I have always had an easier time nailing concepts that just didn't click for me by missing them on a Transcender and then reading the explanation as opposed to hours of cramming myself into a book trying to memorize everything.

/salut Michael, I for one appreciate the fine prodcuts. My only complaint is the price, cuz man does that $150 bucks a pop *hurt* sometimes

TranscenderMichael

Drakonblayde wrote:

/salut Michael, I for one appreciate the fine prodcuts. My only complaint is the price, cuz man does that $150 bucks a pop *hurt* sometimes

I appreciate the compliment.

Um... would a picture of the two cute babies you're helping to feed help soothe the pain any? heheheh!

Yes, they're more expensive than other test prep products, but in my opinion, you get what you pay for. And hey, let's be honest, this is an investment in your career. People spend thousands and tens of thousands of dollars on a college degree (myself included) and hundreds on books for each class... and, in my opinion, this is no different - it's just another aspect of your education. On the other hand, our exams are a whole lot cheaper than training classes!

In accordance with our prices, we have the best guarantee in the business. Fail only once, and receive your money back. Can't beat that!

We put a lot of effort into the exam creation process, and hopefully it makes a difference in your preparation, not only come test time, but also when you're seeing the stuff out in the real world. I'm no salesperson - I used to be a network engineer, and I remember what sorts of things *I* wanted to know, so that's what I try to teach.

Again, I appreciate the compliment. It makes it easier to burn the midnight oil to get a product released when I know that it's going to make a difference to someone's career.

Drakonblayde

TranscenderMichael wrote:

Yes, they're more expensive than other test prep products, but in my opinion, you get what you pay for. And hey, let's be honest, this is an investment in your career. People spend thousands and tens of thousands of dollars on a college degree (myself included) and hundreds on books for each class... and, in my opinion, this is no different - it's just another aspect of your education. On the other hand, our exams are a whole lot cheaper than training classes!

Yeah, but my financial aid pays for my books and tuition Now, if I can con work into paying for Transcenders (they encourage certification and reimburse for each exam passed up to 4k a year once youve been here six months... gonna love that when I go for my CCIE /grin), it'll be chump change to the corporate bank account hehe

In accordance with our prices, we have the best guarantee in the business. Fail only once, and receive your money back. Can't beat that!

We put a lot of effort into the exam creation process, and hopefully it makes a difference in your preparation, not only come test time, but also when you're seeing the stuff out in the real world. I'm no salesperson - I used to be a network engineer, and I remember what sorts of things *I* wanted to know, so that's what I try to teach.

Again, I appreciate the compliment. It makes it easier to burn the midnight oil to get a product released when I know that it's going to make a difference to someone's career.

Hey man, I got sold when I was studying for my Net+. And especially for my freaking Microsoft exams... my god Microsoft has some of the most convoluted logic and a**backwards terminology that I needed all the help I could get to keep some of that crap straight. You keep making 'em, I'll keep buying 'em. Seems I'm always studying for something

TranscenderMichael

Reimbursement? Very nice! I'm looking forward to doing the CCIE soon... I hope we tackle the computer-based exam this year, especially since I'm on the Cisco team.

I guess I'm used to the Microsoft terminology - in my opinion, they seem to have gotten a lot better since the Windows 2000 exams.

Now, I respect CompTIA... even have some of their certifications... but some of their questions are terrible! Experienced that most recently on Security+. Can only miss 17 out of 100 questions, so every little bit counts.

Drakonblayde

TranscenderMichael wrote:

Reimbursement? Very nice! I'm looking forward to doing the CCIE soon... I hope we tackle the computer-based exam this year, especially since I'm on the Cisco team.

Oh goody, if I fail BSCI, I'm coming for your head

I guess I'm used to the Microsoft terminology - in my opinion, they seem to have gotten a lot better since the Windows 2000 exams.

I'm used to it now, but just stupid crap like calling print drivers printers and printers print devices. I'm like 'boy, they really do live in their own world don't they?' But it's like my instructors have always said, the correct answer is whatever gets you credit on the test. Which corrollates to them saying that there are usually two answers... the real answer, and the Microsoft (or lately, Cisco) answer.

Now, I respect CompTIA... even have some of their certifications... but some of their questions are terrible! Experienced that most recently on Security+. Can only miss 17 out of 100 questions, so every little bit counts.

See man, I can't hang with you there. I don't really have a whole lot of respect for CompTIA left. I regard my Net+ as worthless, I felt cheated by my A+ (200 bucks for both exams and I finish in less than 15 minutes, including survey questions for both exams... give me a break, adaptive testing my pale geeky behind, if you can tell whether or not I can not break a computer or an OS in 20 questions or less the Great Kreskin is out of a job).

Sec+ I kinda want just for the resume fluffing, but I've heard so many horror stories about how awful the questions are that I'm not going to bother until they revise it. If they make it harder, hey, no problem, I like challenges, as long as it's not ambigious

TranscenderMichael

Drakonblayde wrote:

Oh goody, if I fail BSCI, I'm coming for your head

I didn't say I updated the BSCI product... heh! I think I'm about to start on the BCMSN update and then the CIT update.

See man, I can't hang with you there. I don't really have a whole lot of respect for CompTIA left. I regard my Net+ as worthless, I felt cheated by my A+ (200 bucks for both exams and I finish in less than 15 minutes, including survey questions for both exams... give me a break, adaptive testing my pale geeky behind, if you can tell whether or not I can not break a computer or an OS in 20 questions or less the Great Kreskin is out of a job).

Sec+ I kinda want just for the resume fluffing, but I've heard so many horror stories about how awful the questions are that I'm not going to bother until they revise it. If they make it harder, hey, no problem, I like challenges, as long as it's not ambigious

I completely agree. Harder is OK, but I can't prove I know something if the questions (or choices) are ambiguous. At least Sec+ is 100 questions... not 20 questions like A+ was (it's now longer and no longer adaptive, from what I understand).

My next personal certification is probably going to be the CWNA exam... plus, I need to get off my behind and study for the GMAT.

Ricka182

Yeah, they were just talkin about us on PTI on ESPN. We are no longer lovable losers of the sports world....As for the B's, our owner totally sucks when it comes to hockey. Jacobs has publically stated that the Bruins are not a sports franchise, but a business which earns a lot of money. He sucks! Hockey rules!!! Stupid owners/players/league people. Doesn't matter who's fault it is, someone should call their help desk. Also, I would love to see Urlacher next to Tedy, but only in our uniform ......

tschnabel99

I wondered how long it would take transcender to show up. How bout my money back? You can't explain away the poor interface design. Having a difficult question is no problem but having it MADE difficult because of poorly worded questions is another. No english major would approve of the way questions are presented. I assume this is one of the design jobs that is being exported over seas, so that may explain the quality. I love to get it started......

If this string continues I will post all the negative design elements and some poor Q-A

NPA24

Wait a minute here. This thread went from me posting about Transcenders to sports! This is great. But after reading this post now, I think I might give Transcenders another try.

Webmaster

Please try to stay on topic people

Football www.techexams.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6791

TranscenderMichael

tschnabel99 wrote:

I wondered how long it would take transcender to show up. How bout my money back? You can't explain away the poor interface design. Having a difficult question is no problem but having it MADE difficult because of poorly worded questions is another. No english major would approve of the way questions are presented. I assume this is one of the design jobs that is being exported over seas, so that may explain the quality. I love to get it started......

If this string continues I will post all the negative design elements and some poor Q-A

Didn't originally see this post - my apologies.

If you want your money back, there is a full money back guarantee after you have failed an exam, provided you are within the terms of the guarantee (mostly time limitation stuff).

As explained before, we present the questions in a similar manner to how the Microsoft questions are presented.

Secondly, we have editors, some of which are English majors, who edit our content for grammatical accuracy. Further, we have technical editors who are quite proficient with the product to edit our content for technical accuracy.

Finally, 70-218 was not a "design job that was exported overseas" (unless you consider Nashville, TN as "overseas").

I would encourage you to post the negative design elements - we cannot improve unless we know what isn't working. Constructive criticism is welcomed. However, be advised that posting our exam content on a public forum is a breach of United States and international Copyright Law.

Yes, you do seem to love to "get it started"... on other forums, it would be called "trolling" or "flaming". I'm more than happy to discuss concerns or problems with you... but if this is just going to be a flamefest, I'll have no part of it and I would encourage you to try another vendor's practice exam product in the future.

I truly hope that we can discuss this rather than throw around baseless claims.

tschnabel99

If I have a client with:
172.16.10.15
255.255.255.224

and a server with:
172.16.10.35
255.255.255.192

couldn't I change the subnet mask on EITHER one to match the other and they would be able to communicate or would they still be on different subnets? So if they BOTH had 255.255.255.224 would they be able to communicate on a single subnet?

tschnabel99

If a client computer is sucessfully able to obtain an IP address doesn't that imply they were either:

"are able to obtain the address"
or
"sucessfully obtained an IP address"

sucessfully able? If they are not able to obtain an IP then they were not sucessful. If they are unsuccessful at obtaining the IP then they weren't able.

Original statement: My client was successfully able to obtain the default gateway. (similar to a practice test question)

New statement:

My client successfully obtained the default gateway.
or
My client was able to obtain the gateway.

This grammatical example is based on wording from Transcender but is not a direct quote or copyright infringement.

TranscenderMichael

So we're not perfect. Find a product that is - study guide, practice exam, whitepaper, or the even the live exam. We try to create the best product possible.

You can report any problems you find using the test engine or by using the Contact Us link on the Web site.

Jerz

tschnabel99 wrote:

If I have a client with:
172.16.10.15
255.255.255.224

and a server with:
172.16.10.35
255.255.255.192

couldn't I change the subnet mask on EITHER one to match the other and they would be able to communicate or would they still be on different subnets? So if they BOTH had 255.255.255.224 would they be able to communicate on a single subnet?

If they were both on 255.255.255.224 they would be on different subnets. The subnet ID for 172.16.10.15 would be 172.16.10.0 and the 172.16.10.35 address would be on the 172.16.10.32 subnet id.

If both addresses had the mask of 255.255.255.192 then both ip addresses would be on the 172.16.10.0 subnet since the range would be 172.16.10.1 through 172.16.10.63.


Jerz

TranscenderMichael

tschnabel99 wrote:

If I have a client with:
172.16.10.15
255.255.255.224

and a server with:
172.16.10.35
255.255.255.192

couldn't I change the subnet mask on EITHER one to match the other and they would be able to communicate or would they still be on different subnets? So if they BOTH had 255.255.255.224 would they be able to communicate on a single subnet?

If you change the 172.16.10.15 to subnet mask 255.255.255.192, then they will be on the same subnet (range from 172.16.10.0 to 172.16.10.63).

If you change the 172.16.10.35 to subnet mask 255.255.255.224, then they will be on different subnets (one range from 172.16.10.0-172.16.10.31, the other from 172.16.10.32 to 172.16.10.63).

Edit: I have experienced real-world situations in which devices using different subnet masks can still communicate if the ranges overlap, like this scenario.

TranscenderMichael

Jerz wrote:

tschnabel99 wrote:

If I have a client with:
172.16.10.15
255.255.255.224

and a server with:
172.16.10.35
255.255.255.192

couldn't I change the subnet mask on EITHER one to match the other and they would be able to communicate or would they still be on different subnets? So if they BOTH had 255.255.255.224 would they be able to communicate on a single subnet?

If they were both on 255.255.255.224 they would be on different subnets. The subnet ID for 172.16.10.15 would be 172.16.10.0 and the 172.16.10.35 address would be on the 172.16.10.32 subnet id.

If both addresses had the mask of 255.255.255.192 then both ip addresses would be on the 172.16.10.0 subnet since the range would be 172.16.10.1 through 172.16.10.63.


Jerz

Beat me by 2 minutes!