Re: Oracle Certification

From: Hans Forbrich <forbrich_at_yahoo.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:43:48 GMT
Message-ID: <U0i8c.6715$Ct5.64@edtnps89>

Daniel Morgan wrote something from which I snipped:

> Hans Forbrich wrote:
>

>>>That would kill it, or devalue it, for the same reason it has done so
>>>with the OCP. Education needs to be for the pure purpose of education.
>>>Not with an ROI attached: Something any unit of Oracle Corp. must, by
>>>necessity, have.
>> 
>> Are you implying that ALL cerification (CNE, CTT+, LPIC, MCSE ...) is of
>> no
>> value, or just Oracle's?  Or perhaps just corporate-sponsored (CNE, CLE,
>> MSCE ...)?

>
> Depends on how you define value. Here are some possibilities.
>
> 1. Value = Helps the certificate holder get a job
> 2. Value = Proves to an employer the certificate holder has a skill set
> 3. Value = Proves holder possesses a specific level of competency.
>
> If CNE, CTT+, LPIC, MCSE meet the first criteria then they have value.
> My argument is that the OCP does not. Nor does it meet criterions 2 or 3.
>

I just wanted to confirm. It seemed that the argument against certification had changed to "Education needs to be for the pure purpose of education. Not with an ROI attached" per your previous response.

So I conclude your issue is not certification, but OCP.

>> There are other ways for Oracle to interact with post-secondary
>> institutes, such as educational discounts on licenses, which would help
>> more.

>
> Or at least as much. Amazingly Oracle has actually sent its license dogs
> into major universities to argue licenses when the issue was not what
> the school was using for its own administration but rather for teaching
> students. Talk about an act of short-sightedness. One schools response
> ... they stopped teaching the subject. <sarcasm> Well that certainly
> helped Oracle's bottom-line </sarcasm>.

I know. <SIGH!!!!!> I walk into the bookstore at the local, and reasonably reputable, tech college (NAIT) and see nothing but SQL Server stuff, and one excessivly obsolete early-Oracle7 reference. Reason is simple - they'd have to pay big-time for Oracle software. <ARGHHHH!>

>> 
>> Isn't there an "Oracle myths" site somewhere?  Or is that a myth?

>
> I know Tom Kyte has put together a presentation, I may have had a copy
> at one time, on the subject of Oracle myths. It would be a good place to
> start.
>

Excellent idea.

>> In Alberta's case, the problem is simply that the competition (MS) is
>> perceived as much more attractive than Oracle strictly on a pricing
>> basis.

>
> Which is amazing as the prices are effectively identical.

Not really. MS uses the 'our EE is $x, their EE is a much bigger $y' argument. And customer management buys it. I've seen it in action!

You have to realize the Alberta enterprise base only has a handful of > $500M companies. (And that's Canadian $). And the majority of those are either public sector (or recently dereg'd utilities) or US subsidiaries where the buying rules are predefined.

The rest of the market is mainly under 200 employee, under $100M annual revenue. Not the best market for Oracle's traditional 'big fish, big deals' mentality.

>> Do we need any rules?  Such as 'post reference where the error exists',
>> and 'post why it's wrong'?

>
> I think references and/or examples are critical: Preferably demonstrable
> proof.
>

>> And - are there any possible problems, such as legal implications to
>> referencing specific books, etc.

>
> Last time I checked ... free speech was free speech. If anyone wants
> to sue me for pointing out that you can use ORDER BY in a view ...
> let them and their attack dogs try it.
>

My objective is to help people find these things quickly and understand why they are a problem. Let's try this on for size:

Subject contains "MYTH:"
Contents contain the following if possible:

Synopsis or brief description:
Submitted by (optional):
Effective or first noticed in Oracle version: Wrong in OCP exams? (Y/N):
Incorrect in the following documents:
Proof (pref. SQL example):

(By keeping these as separate threads but using an easily identifiable subject, we can encourage followup discussions.)

Comments?
/Hans Received on Wed Mar 24 2004 - 09:43:48 CST