.net 3.5

Ok so I am in the running for a job that combines system support (windows) and some light (and growing) .net development (you read that right). So depending if I get this job or another job I am in the running for, I may be going after the following

MCSA:S(going to do no matter what)
MCSA:M (going to do if I get job A)

MCTS: .net 3.5 70-536 (going to do if I get job

MCTS Sharepoint("")
MCTS SQL server ("")

Sharepoint is going to be fully trained on some I am not to worried about that. I am somewhat familiar with SQL server and I think I can pull that off with some effort. .Net is why I am posting this. I have done some development (but that was over 5 years ago and I didn't touch .net) and I am curious how difficult the .net certs are. Assume that I am a noob coming in with no exp, how difficult would it be to get me to cert level. I feel that I am a "fast learner" and I WILL do what I have to do to get that scrilla (that's money if you aren't hip) but I am also realistic. I don't want to set myself up for a fail. Would 2-3 months, maybe 2 hours a day be enough for Joe IT worker?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Webmaster

Though I do think it's doable to pass the exam after studying 2-3 months at 2 hours a day, it'll be a tough challenge for anyone if you have no .NET experience yet. It's the foundation exam yet a certain foundation is assumed before you start with it. To practice many of the topics you will need to have some experience with Visual Studio, setting up simple form applications in which you implement the classes and functions for the 536 exam for example, as well as getting familiar with the syntax and very basic classes and functions. That doesn't have to take years or even months, but I wouldn't include that in the time frame for the 536 itself. James and I wrote some articles/tutorials in the blogs about .Net including one for the 536 exam.

"Candidates should have at least two to three years of experience developing Web-based, Windows-based, or distributed applications by using the Microsoft .NET Framework". Imo two to three years is a lot more than needed, but it does tell something about the amount of topics as well (they packed them very tightly together in those exam objectives).

Good luck getting one of those jobs!

JDMurray

First of all, there's no such thing as "light .NET development." Microsoft's .NET languages are for software engineering projects that use object-oriented design. Besides learning one or more .NET languages (C# or Visual Basic.NET), there is the entire .NET Framework to tackle as well. The .NET programming certs require you to know both. Knowing Object-Oriented software development isn't necessary for the exams, but it is necessary for architecting well-designed .NET applications.

If you are to become a SharePoint applications programmer, you will essentially be an ASP.NET programmer using Microsoft Visual Studio 2008, and C# is the recommended language (it's what's use at Microsoft itself). If you will be writing programs largely for administering servers and network resources, .NET is not what you need and you should look into learning PowerShell scripting instead. Gonna do both? Then you need both.

Bl8ckr0uter

Webmaster wrote: »

Though I do think it's doable to pass the exam after studying 2-3 months at 2 hours a day, it'll be a tough challenge for anyone if you have no .NET experience yet. It's the foundation exam yet a certain foundation is assumed before you start with it. To practice many of the topics you will need to have some experience with Visual Studio, setting up simple form applications in which you implement the classes and functions for the 536 exam for example, as well as getting familiar with the syntax and very basic classes and functions. That doesn't have to take years or even months, but I wouldn't include that in the time frame for the 536 itself. James and I wrote some articles/tutorials in the blogs about .Net including one for the 536 exam.

Its the WEBMASTER himself! I am honored lol..

Cool. You said exactly what I need to hear. The job would require me to learn .net quickly and that would be very good inspiration to get the cert done.

Webmaster wrote: »

"Candidates should have at least two to three years of experience developing Web-based, Windows-based, or distributed applications by using the Microsoft .NET Framework". Imo two to three years is a lot more than needed, but it does tell something about the amount of topics as well (they packed them very tightly together in those exam objectives).

Good luck getting one of those jobs!

See this is the kind of stuff that makes me mad. 2-3 years exp for a FOUNDATIONAL cert? WTF? The way I thought about this test, I made it out to be the A+ of .net development. Maybe I am quite wrong about this thing. Oh well.

Bl8ckr0uter

I am really bringing the big dogs out on this thread.

JDMurray wrote: »

First of all, there's no such thing as "light .NET development." Microsoft's .NET languages are for software engineering projects that use object-oriented design. Besides learning one or more .NET languages (C# or Visual Basic.NET), there is the entire .NET Framework to tackle as well. The .NET programming certs require you to know both. Knowing Object-Oriented software development isn't necessary for the exams, but it is necessary for architecting well-designed .NET applications.

You ain't lying. This is the conversation

"...and we are trying to fill this job very soon. We need someone who will be support our servers and workstations, sharepoint, and other windows based technologies. Also this person will need to know .net programming for this position will require light development"

I was sitting their thinking WTF did she just say. So I made her repeat that last sentence (thinking I misheard) but sure enough, "light" development. The company is big but the IT department is quite small and I think they are looking for an everyman.

JDMurray wrote: »

If you are to become a SharePoint applications programmer, you will essentially be an ASP.NET programmer using Microsoft Visual Studio 2008, and C# is the recommended language (it's what's use at Microsoft itself). If you will be writing programs largely for administering servers and network resources, .NET is not what you need and you should look into learning PowerShell scripting instead. Gonna do both? Then you need both.

I have some experience with ASP.net but that was about 5 years ago.
I may be interviewing for that position within the next day so I will make sure I get them to clarify but from what HR said, they want Sharepoint and .net.

Webmaster

knwminus wrote:

The way I thought about this test, I made it out to be the A+ of .net development. Maybe I am quite wrong about this thing. Oh well.

Yeah that would be majorly underestimating this exam. It's not the same, but I'd say on scale of difficulty and amount of topics it's probably closer to the written exam of the CCIE than the A+ exam. I probably should have said 'very' tough challenge. It may be doable to pass the exam, with the right study material, but that depends a lot on how much time you put into learning the basics first (and how much 'programming' experience you have, and how fast you pick it up etc) and you will want more than just pass the exam.

The target audience describes the ideal target audience, if you think passing this exam will be beneficial to you, you don't have to gain 2-3 years experience before you do, but again, it does say something about the large amount of topics you'll have to learn if you start .NET from scratch so it's certainly not to be underestimated.

Bl8ckr0uter

Webmaster wrote: »

Yeah that would be majorly underestimating this exam. It's not the same, but I'd say on scale of difficulty and amount of topics it's probably closer to the written exam of the CCIE than the A+ exam.

Ok. Thanks for the clarification

JDMurray

knwminus wrote: »

See this is the kind of stuff that makes me mad. 2-3 years exp for a FOUNDATIONAL cert? WTF? The way I thought about this test, I made it out to be the A+ of .net development. Maybe I am quite wrong about this thing. Oh well.

There is a difference here between "foundational" and "entry-level". The 2-3 years is a recommendation and not a requirement, and 2-3 years of experience is considered "foundational" by Microsoft. You can read what others have posted here about taking the .NET exams (I've never taken any myself), and they all seem to be glad to have had years of .NET programming experience under their belts before taking the exams.

Bl8ckr0uter

JDMurray wrote: »

There is a difference here between "foundational" and "entry-level". The 2-3 years is a recommendation and not a requirement, and 2-3 years of experience is considered "foundational" by Microsoft. You can read what others have posted here about taking the .NET exams (I've never taken any myself), and they all seem to be glad to have had years of .NET programming experience under their belts before taking the exams.

I guess I thought of foundational as entry level....

At any rate I will asked them to clarify what they want and then go from there.

Webmaster

In the meantime, if you haven't yet, you could download Visual Studio Express and/or watch some virtual labs (ie visual basic/c#) and get a better idea of what you are "getting yourself into" if you do decide to go for the exam.

Bl8ckr0uter

Webmaster wrote: »

In the meantime, if you haven't yet, you could download Visual Studio Express and/or watch some virtual labs (ie visual basic/c#) and get a better idea of what you are "getting yourself into" if you do decide to go for the exam.

Thanks for the idea. I will probably go to dreamspark and grab visual studio 2005 or 2008.

JDMurray

I would also recommend reading through the SharePoint developers docs at Microsoft's site. They have minimum requirements for things like version of databases than can be used, and the differences between SP 2007 and 2010. There might also be a SharePoint project wizard in VS now.