Cisco vs Microsoft certs

Hopefully this question won't result in a bloodbath, but what certs do you think are more valuable and worth pursuing? Are Cisco certs head and shouldars above Microsoft certs? Or is it the other way around?

Personally, I think Microsoft is an evil corporation that spits out buggy software on an almost constant basis, so why bother getting certified to use an inferior product? Cisco is the industry leader in networking and seems to be a more productive use of ones time.

Agree? Disagree?

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

Danman32

Cisco is a router, MS is OS software. You may need one, or both depending on what you plan to do.

Now asking if you should get a Linux cert versus an MS cert would have been a question that made more sense, especially with the comment you made.

garv221

sir_creamy_ wrote:

Hopefully this question won't result in a bloodbath, but what certs do you think are more valuable and worth pursuing? Are Cisco certs head and shouldars above Microsoft certs? Or is it the other way around?

Personally, I think Microsoft is an evil corporation that spits out buggy software on an almost constant basis, so why bother getting certified to use an inferior product? Cisco is the industry leader in networking and seems to be a more productive use of ones time.

Agree? Disagree?

Disagree. Might as well compare Apples and Oranges? About the MS comment- You might as well stop breathing now because the air in the free world is some what polluted.

sprkymrk

They are both good to have, not sure if one beats out the other. CCIE is pretty much the recognized King of Certs, but the various MS ones seem to be the most common in job postings.

sir_creamy_ wrote:

Personally, I think Microsoft is an evil corporation that spits out buggy software on an almost constant basis, so why bother getting certified to use an inferior product? Cisco is the industry leader in networking and seems to be a more productive use of ones time.

A corporation is neither evil nor good, people are. Cisco buys up just as many of the smaller companies that would otherwise compete with them, and has to periodically update it's own IOS due to security issues too. Not much different than MS in some ways. And if you feel that MS is evil and buggy, feel free to stop using it.

As far as the reason to get certified on this inferior product, I suppose thousands of individuals who have benefitted from doing so would be able to mention a reason or two. How about "Help get job", or "Make more money", or "learn how to administer my company's network", or something like that?

blackzone

sir_creamy_ wrote:

Personally, I think Microsoft is an evil corporation that spits out buggy software on an almost constant basis, so why bother getting certified to use an inferior product? Cisco is the industry leader in networking and seems to be a more productive use of ones time.

Agree? Disagree?

I think it's more evil that Company makes money from the certificate of the IT professionals.

But it's really works both way, the IT professionals' pay money to the certificate distribution company so they could get better way(typo, i mean pay).

As buggy as Microsoft is(or you think it is), there isn't too many alternative or competition. It's not easy to make an OS.

On the other hand, believe or not, it's pretty easy to make a router. Two reason why Cisco don't have too much competition is marketing and brand loyalty. And the router market isn't that big that company bother to compete with Cisco.

TeKniques

sir_creamy_ wrote:

Hopefully this question won't result in a bloodbath, but what certs do you think are more valuable and worth pursuing? Are Cisco certs head and shouldars above Microsoft certs? Or is it the other way around?

Personally, I think Microsoft is an evil corporation that spits out buggy software on an almost constant basis, so why bother getting certified to use an inferior product? Cisco is the industry leader in networking and seems to be a more productive use of ones time.

Agree? Disagree?

I think having both is the best option. I think an MCSE + CCNA is a pretty valuable candidate to any organization. I agree with other comments that it's very difficult to compare the two because they are just different technologies. I think it also depends on what type of career path you want in IT.

As far as MS being evil, I'm not really sure how this was all brought out except that the socialist press wants to make MS out to be the bad guy citing anti-trust laws. No one is forcing anyone to use their software, granted when you buy a Dell, Gateway, or whatever else, it comes with Windows on it, but come on folks ... MS Windows is on 95% of the World's computers. If you don't like it just use a different OS, but a career in IT will almost certainly involve knowing MS Windows to a certain extent.

Olajuwon

You're not giving me any reason not to be rude to you with the comment you made above. Ok, I will try to remain calm and refrain from saying anything inappropriate.

It all depends on what you want to fulfill as a career. Having knowledge of both products is the best choice. Like someone says above, MCSE + CCNA is great combination for an admin.

bighornsheep

sir_creamy_ wrote:

Hopefully this question won't result in a bloodbath, but what certs do you think are more valuable and worth pursuing? Are Cisco certs head and shouldars above Microsoft certs? Or is it the other way around?

Personally, I think Microsoft is an evil corporation that spits out buggy software on an almost constant basis, so why bother getting certified to use an inferior product? Cisco is the industry leader in networking and seems to be a more productive use of ones time.

Agree? Disagree?

You go to University of Waterloo? I'm assuming that's the one located in Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, Canada? Is that where you picked up the 'Microsoft is evil' idea? That's kind of sad to hear. I realize you guys are all pro-RIM because it's based there, but it doesnt make Microsoft evil.

Yes I agree to an extent that some of the business practices of Microsoft, are questionable. ie. their corporate takeovers, marketing plans, software deisng practices. But I am sure every corporation has their short coming, the success of Microsoft has just made them a BIG SPOTLIGHT in the industry drawing attention, comments, putdowns, and critizism.

Keep an open mind. Dont be brainwashed.

sir_creamy_

Sigh. Yes, Mirosoft is evil.

---> http://www.mathnews.uwaterloo.ca/Issues/mn9305/widnoz.php

"I realize you guys are all pro-RIM because it's based there, but it doesnt make Microsoft evil."

---> Pro-RIM = Anti-Microsoft? When did that happen?

"As buggy as Microsoft is(or you think it is) "

---> I just installed a fresh version of XP. Two service packs and 54 security updates later I was ready to use it. Yes, it is buggy.

"How about "Help get job", or "Make more money", or "learn how to administer my company's network", or something like that?"

---> Good point. It gets you places. But where is the love sprky? The love!

"And if you feel that MS is evil and buggy, feel free to stop using it."

---> Never said I use it to begin with.

How many babies did I kick? The "Microsoft is evil" debate has been discussed many times over. I'm just saying what we already know.

blackzone

sir_creamy_ wrote:

http://www.mathnews.uwaterloo.ca/Issues/mn9305/widnoz.php

I keep on telling people University education is over rated and no one believes me.

sprkymrk

sir_creamy_ wrote:

"How about "Help get job", or "Make more money", or "learn how to administer my company's network", or something like that?"

---> Good point. It gets you places. But where is the love sprky? The love!

I love my job! I love my toys! I love the fact that MS gives me job security!

sir_creamy_ wrote:

"And if you feel that MS is evil and buggy, feel free to stop using it."

---> Never said I use it to begin with.

Yes you did...

sir_creamy_ wrote:

---> I just installed a fresh version of XP. Two service packs and 54 security updates later I was ready to use it.

Busted! I am telling all your linux buddies!

TheFORCE

If microsoft is so evil, then why most of the IT world out there uses their products?

mikej412

TheFORCE wrote:

If microsoft is so evil, then why most of the IT world out there uses their products?

Job Security!

I've been on projects with 6 admins for 5 MS Servers and 2 Admins for 150 UNIX Servers.... and the UNIX guys didn't have to carry pagers.

int80h

TeKniques wrote:

MS Windows is on 95% of the World's computers.

Wrong. Windows runs on 95% of the worlds PCs. Since PCs are a small minority of the worlds computers, Windows runs on a small minority of the worlds computers.

VxWorks and TRON both run on more computers than any MS OS.

Slowhand

sir_creamy_ wrote:

---> I just installed a fresh version of XP. Two service packs and 54 security updates later I was ready to use it. Yes, it is buggy.

Most of the opinions that came in response to this thread I'd have to agree with. CCIE is still the king of the hill in cert-land, followed closely by things like CISSP, and the like. MCSE is usually delegated down to the level of CCNA/CCNP. (But we'll see what the MCA brings.) And I'd agree, they're not really comparable, as far as "what's better". My company wants me to be MCSE and CCNP, along with LPIC-2, so I have a well-rounded set of skills, and that's just for starters. (Well, right now I'm pounding away at Linux+ and SCSA)

In any case, regarding your comment. For the record, all software needs to be patched. Be it Redhat Linux, BSD, or the Cisco IOS; (all of which I have personally installed plenty of patches, fixes, and updates for. Hell, I even had to upgrade the IOS due to a security advisory from Cisco about vurnerabilities in the older software.) In fact, tomorrow I'll be working to update two BIND servers running off of a set of BSD machines, and another on a Windows machine, because ISC sent us a notice that their software was vurnerable to an attack, and we should patch or upgrade to version 9.3.2-P1 immediately, if we cared to keep your organization secure.

Microsoft gets the brunt of the stigma surrounding updates, since it's a very, very popular operating system and most attacks are directed at it; but all software goes through "involintary penetration testing", forcing updates to fix these newly-discovered problems. In fact, I remember having to update Firefox not too long ago, because it was letting a strain of trojans into my machine, bypassing the firewall and antivirus. (Mozilla was very good about getting back to me when I wrote to them, even if I did come off as a little. . . well. . . "stressed".)

Updated the software, went from version 1.1 to 1.5, and the trojans didn't have a way in anymore. I guess that makes Mozilla just as evil as Microsoft, releasing buggy software that anyone can just write hacks for?

blackzone

You should at least have some knowledge of windows workstation and server.

Microsoft did do a very good job for server 2003 and XP and how they work together in a business environment, because that's what it is deigned for. Linux at it's current state just can't compare.

I'm a strong Linux supporter since I like free stuff. But I'm not too happy when I saw my ADSL password in plain text.

And I dont really enjoy editing everything from ".conf" file. It is getting better though as people are building GUI interface support for most application.

The truth is I find windows so much more convinient to use. It's really a time saving factor. Sure after 2 SP, 54 patches your XP is ready to use. But I rather do that than patching my Linux kernel which I forget how to do.

strauchr

Guess you can call me part of the evil clan. I have geared my career towards MS based products after having experienced many other products. Its just going to get stronger as the TCO is generally lower and its functionality is unparalelled (however its spelt).

Apart from that have you ever worked with Lotus Notes? Perhaps Symantec software? Just a couple of big names to have some of the buggiest software around with the worst customer service. At least with MS you can get a bug fixed relatively quick and easy.

By the way Novell, Linux, Cisco, Lotus, Symantec software all needs to have security updates applied regularly - just no one exploits them as much or it doesn't get much publicity.

And you can get a XP install with SP2 slip streamed so you don't have to install 2 service packs. Kinda showing your lack of knowledge and experience with your post in which case I'd refrain from making sensationalist claims if I were you.

blackzone

strauchr wrote:

By the way Novell, Linux, Cisco, Lotus, Symantec software all needs to have security updates applied regularly - just no one exploits them as much or it doesn't get much publicity.

I dont' know about that. Microsoft's security hole is big though, at the start you got spontaneous reboot worm, then after sp2 you got scvhost error which stopped access to the internet, 1 year after the hotfix you got another scvhost which force stop on internet access.

But at least it's patched, and quickly patched.

Vogon Poet

I see people like to get off-topic.
Your question of the more valuable cert depends on you. I would agree that both are good to have.
Don't forget that certs are about accomplishing career goals, therefore goal setting is important. Decide what you want to accomplish and how to get there. Maybe you need both certs, maybe not.
Your preference to one company's products over anothers is irrelevant to the guy that's going to hire you. He just wants to know that you're qualified.
Caveat to that...it might not be irrelevant to him if you bash Microsoft in your interview, and the company is hiring you to manage their MS OS. Be professional.

TeKniques

int80h wrote:

Wrong. Windows runs on 95% of the worlds PCs. Since PCs are a small minority of the worlds computers, Windows runs on a small minority of the worlds computers.

VxWorks and TRON both run on more computers than any MS OS.

Oh ... I'm sorry, let me rephrase that then:

Windows is on approximately 90% of the client operating system market

To all you VxWorks and TRON users ... no disrespect. I didn't mean to fudge my numbers by 5% either, I was basing that off memory.

strauchr wrote:

Apart from that have you ever worked with Lotus Notes? Perhaps Symantec software? Just a couple of big names to have some of the buggiest software around with the worst customer service. At least with MS you can get a bug fixed relatively quick and easy.

Want to hear something ironic? I used to work for Symantec and not only did we use the in-house AV (of course) we also used Lotus Notes as the Email system!

The main thing that everyone seems to forget is that hardening any OS/platform for security holes is a tough task if you want it done right.

Webmaster

mikej412 wrote:

I've been on projects with 6 admins for 5 MS Servers and 2 Admins for 150 UNIX Servers.... and the UNIX guys didn't have to carry pagers.

That's obviously not entirely OS-related but more a matter of competence, or should I say incompetence.

Sprkymrk wrote:

A corporation is neither evil nor good, people are.

Exactly, and the many of the people working for this particular corporation are techies just like us. (apart from having better job security

)

It reminds me of a story I heard a couple of days ago. At a meeting a google, when it was still a rather small company, one of the founders didn't show up, but he left a message at the bottom corner of a whiteboard: "Don't be evil". It's now their corporate motto. Not sure if it's the exact story but I'm sure 'google' will show up plenty of results when searching for "Don't be evil".

I guess he realized someday they may become big enough to be considered 'evil'. It's seems to be the nature of people to start kicking against the things the rely so heavily on (Microsoft and Google more and more...).

The topic is lost already, which seems to be inevitable. For what it's worth, it is indeed comparing Apples and Oranges, and both taste good so if you think they can be useful, why deny yourself one of them.

A CCNA or more seems to go well with an MCSE, it worked well for me, but if you are a CCNP, CCSP etc, and you have a full-time networking job in which you only work with Cisco equipment, I wouldn't bother with anything more than an MCP for the current Windows client and/or server exam, if they aren't all on Linux/Unix

garv221

Webmaster wrote:

It reminds me of a story I heard a couple of days ago. At a meeting a google, when it was still a rather small company, one of the founders didn't show up, but he left a message at the bottom corner of a whiteboard: "Don't be evil". It's now their corporate motto. Not sure if it's the exact story but I'm sure 'google' will show up plenty of results when searching for "Don't be evil".

http://investor.google.com/conduct.html