70-685 Passed

gomcse2002

Hi there

Passed my 70-680 and 70-685 lately. But when I look at my online MS transcript, I don't see I get another MCITp title called : Enterprise Desktop Support Technician, Windows 7.

may I know is there something wrong with the transcript system on MCP web site ???

Please kindly advise.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

RobertKaucher

Congrats, and they must have decided that that was what would be required. I guess no HDI exam!

littlehoops

I think he says he does not see the EDST. so that means he needs to take the HDI exam.

RobertKaucher

Despite my previous message I am able to read....

I promise.

Last I heard from MS LEarning they were still trying to decide what the requirements would be for the exam.

Has anyone actually heard about the requirements being finalized? Anyone actually have the EST7 cert yet?

eserfeliz

RobertKaucher wrote: »

Despite my previous message I am able to read.... I promise.

Last I heard from MS LEarning they were still trying to decide what the requirements would be for the exam.

Has anyone actually heard about the requirements being finalized? Anyone actually have the EST7 cert yet?

I chatted with a representative from MS Learning today: there is definitely something on hold with the EST7 cert. I guess the negative backlash re: the HDI certification made them reevaluate the track it would take.

Accordingly, 70-682 has been put on hold as well. According to the associate I spoke with, they're not sure whether it will be released or not. Make of that what you will.

edit: Also, I called HDI to see about them updating my MS transcript with my HDI certification: they told me that they didn't have a means of doing so yet. Slow progress as this partnership was announced months ago.

Hyper-Me

It would be incredibly strange - and crappy - of MS to NOT have an upgrade exam from MCITP EST to EDST 7.

I would actually support there NOT being an upgrade path between MCDST and EDST 7.

eserfeliz

Hyper-Me wrote: »

It would be incredibly strange - and crappy - of MS to NOT have an upgrade exam from MCITP EST to EDST 7.

I would actually support there NOT being an upgrade path between MCDST and EDST 7.

Your reasoning being? It's not as if Vista played a huge role in the operations of or generating revenue for Microsoft. I'll go even further and say that there are more people utilizing MCDST credentials than MCITP:EST.

I could pretty easily upgrade to MCITP:EST, but frankly, it's probably a waste of time and resources.

RobertKaucher

eserfeliz wrote: »

Your reasoning being? It's not as if Vista played a huge role in the operations of or generating revenue for Microsoft. I'll go even further and say that there are more people utilizing MCDST credentials than MCITP:EST.

I could pretty easily upgrade to MCITP:EST, but frankly, it's probably a waste of time and resources.

Can you name a single other infrastructure certification from MS that allowed upgrades that skipped a generation? If you had an MCSE 2000 there was no upgrade to MCITP: Enterprise Admin. If you had an MCSE on NT there was no direct upgrade to 2003.

An upgrade exam tends to focus on the technology that is new between Y and Z. If you are upgrading between X and Z then I believe it is likely the exam may be missing certain foundational knowledge assumed in an upgrade exam.

eserfeliz

RobertKaucher wrote: »

Can you name a single other infrastructure certification from MS that allowed upgrades that skipped a generation? If you had an MCSE 2000 there was no upgrade to MCITP: Enterprise Admin. If you had an MCSE on NT there was no direct upgrade to 2003.

An upgrade exam tends to focus on the technology that is new between Y and Z. If you are upgrading between X and Z then I believe it is likely the exam may be missing certain foundational knowledge assumed in an upgrade exam.

If Vista represented a full generation of technology that was developed and utilized by the business world, believe me, I would cede the point immediately. However, there was such a marked backlash to Vista that I don't think that it qualifies in the way that you're stating. Not that I personally have a problem with Vista, I think it's a decent operating system. But in my organization, we never upgraded. Not because there was no plan to, but because we didn't have the resources to upgrade the hardware of 5,000+ desktops and another 1,000+ laptops to facilitate it.

I realise that a lot of forum denizens here are certification geeks, and you love being on the bleeding edge of certs, you take betas, you like to push the envelope, etc. But not everyone is like that. Some people (individuals like myself, IT managers paying for certs, so on) have to make resource based decisions on how to effectively upgrade their skill sets. And if I'm an IT manager that is faced with the decision of migrating from XP to Windows 7 (as we are here in our 6,000+ employee organization), but I'm forced to upgrade the skills of my technicians by way of a technology that neither I nor any other manager in a 50 mile radius is using, well.

I'm going to be a little ticked off. Just sayin'.

Hyper-Me

As Robert said, there have never been upgrade paths for MS certs that bypass entire generations.

Vista was certainly a major revamp of the way things were done in 2000/XP.

Granted, Vista and 7 are very similar so its entirely probable that someone can learn the new concepts and apply them to either platform. I mostly feel that its MS spitting in the face of those who did cert on Vista.

We have 2 sites at work that are entirely Vista, over 1200 desktops/200 laptops and if I didnt have the knowledge of Vista and the new deployment techniques that I did when those sites went up, they would not have launched on time. We were using a near 10 year old version of ghost that simply would not image Vista properly.

There was actually quite a bit of Vista sold, and a number of companies that did upgrade. The thing is, most companies dont upgrade for a year or more when a new OS is released, so a lot of the upgrades were starting or in the middle of it when 7 released.

eserfeliz

Hyper-Me wrote: »

I mostly feel that its MS spitting in the face of those who did cert on Vista.

The way you feel about your Vista cert is the way that a lot of people felt when Longhorn was being tested. At the time, the *minimum* system requirements included 1 GB of RAM and widescreen monitors. Widescreen monitors on every user's desktop so that they can have a widget toolbar on the side.

I'm not downing anyone for working hard to upgrade their skills or trying to take anything away from them. I'm simply stating that the accelerated pace of the release of Windows 7 was due primarily to a PR screw-up about as big as the release of Windows ME, even though the OS wasn't anywhere near that bad.

Neither of you, as knowledgeable as you both are, can tell me that there was widespread adoption of Vista. Whether or not the technology behind Vista was a quantum leap beyond XP and is now an integral part of W7 is largely immaterial. The primary concern, from a certification standpoint, is whether or not there is an operating system on the desktop to support, and whether or not technicians feel confident enough in the technology to support it.

As it pertains to Vista, the answer to that question was clearly a resounding "no." Hence, Windows 7. Microsoft, in essence, said, "Let's take a mulligan." Windows 7 is improved, but it's not monumentally different than Vista.

From here, I guess we can only agree to disagree.

Hyper-Me

I certainly see your point of view and I appreciate your opninion on the matter.

I really just wish that MS Learning would get its act together a little better. They make rules/judgement calls/etc and then go back on it. I think its one of the lesser well ran departments of MS.

RobertKaucher

eserfeliz wrote: »

From here, I guess we can only agree to disagree.

Well, you are assuming the point I was arguing was one I agree with...

I'm fine if there is an upgrade from MCDST to EDST7. The only issue that I see with this is the difficulty of ensuring that a single exam that skips an OS generation is capable of adequately testing all of the changes that have taken place. Certainly this is possible; it just might mean that the exam is 65 questions long or more. I don't know. That's for MS Learning to decide. But I do believe MS needs to be careful with such a practice. I cannot imagine a direct upgrade path from MCSE 2000 to MCITP:EA 2008, for example.

eserfeliz

Hyper-Me wrote: »

I really just wish that MS Learning would get its act together a little better. They make rules/judgement calls/etc and then go back on it. I think its one of the lesser well ran departments of MS.

I think we can both agree on that. I've called MS Learning support twice now, and although the second representative was a little better informed than the first, I didn't like the answer he gave me.

I was asking about the MCDST to EDT7 upgrade. He said it might not happen