Microsoft goes after cheaters hard, and catches smart students

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Uh... Microsoft doesn't drop exams that aren't popular. All the more justification as to whether or not Microsoft's making a veritable gold mine of money on their certification programs.

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Yes I am a programmer, there are currently what 20+ programming exams, I would argue we could save microsoft some cash and make do with 5. The same could be said in many areas. How many cert paths are really required its a serious question ? I'd say we need maybe seven distinct job roles with maybe 5 exams each. Thats 35 exams, a hell of a long way from 163...

I think if you really look at the certification industry, whichever vendor you pick you will see a proliferation of certs/exams. I see no real need for so many exams, surely quality is better than quantity ? Why is there such proliferation if not in pursuit of profit ? Look at all Comptia exams with RFID, Convergence, iNet, look at CIW, does the world really need all these exams ? Whats wrong with learning something without a certifiction, does everything in the world need a certification ? If not for profit why are all these exams being created and then withdrawn in a huge ecosystem of certifications ?

 

Microsoft dropped all their Visual C++ and Visual Basic 6 exams, they no longer exist despite these products being two of their most successful products ever and still being sold and supported. I have seen Microsoft certification development staff explain this was because of 'lack of demand'. Other tracks have been modifed due to lack of demand also.

 

...which still requires a whoooole lot of exams to be created, and it **still** doesn't address the profitability issue.

Regardless, Microsoft believes that there is a need to have that many job roles. Whether you or I agree with them is irrelevant; it's their certification program, which they can run as profitably or as unprofitably as they choose.

To be honest, they'd have more of a chance to run at a profit if they consolidated. But they choose not to. Why do you think that is, if you truly believe Microsoft wants to run their ceritifcation program at a profit? Why add unprofitable, unpopular certifications, if that's the case?? You're hurting your own point... or you're losing track of it in an effort to streamline Microsoft's programs for them, one or the other.

There is such proliferation because Microsoft believes there is that much of a difference between job roles. Again, we can disagree with them all they want, but ultimately, it doesn't matter: it's their program.

Again, CompTIA runs at a profit. You can't put them in the same boat. That said, if people take their exams, obviously there is a need for them. CompTIA exams that AREN'T popular **ARE** discontinued, such as iNet+.

I don't know what you mean by "all these exams being created and then withdrawn". The only exams that are created and withdrawn are those created by the for-profit companies.

 

Dude... they drop exams after the technology is outdated. The VB6 product is no longer supported. They moved out of extended support this year.

There's been multiple VB .NET versions since then... I don't blame them one bit for discontinuing them. Do you believe they should have kept the NT certifications as well?

If you have a link about "lack of demand", I'd love to see it.

You talk as if I am not part of the IT certification industry. This is actually quite amusing!

 

Glad you're amused ! I'm as entitled to my opinion as you are yours.

Ok so it appears VB6 runtime supprt ended april 2008, the exams ended far earlier.

Visual C++ is still in use, the exam was withdrawn years ago. The cert tracks seem to largely fit with their marketing stratergy, not the technology. There is some talk of reintroducing a C++ exam, but only if there is demand.

The Business Intelligence exams met with lukewarm reception, result ? Theres now one exam in the 2008 track instead of two in the 2005 track.

My arguments are consistent, because unlike you I believe they turn a profit and that they withdraw exams which you don't. Introduce an exam, see if it makes a profit keep it, if not remove it, its the same process many hit/miss industries use like films or music.

http://blogs.msdn.com/gerryo/archive/2007/12/04/calling-all-c-developers.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/status/examsretired.mspx

Visual C++ 6 exam retired June 30, 2004.

I can no longer find the exact comments I remember, I'll leave it at that.

 

I don't have an opinion in this matter. I'm stating why certification isn't a profit center for Microsoft; my opinion is irrelevant.

You are correct. However, exams are eligible for retirement (and the new certifications expire) when mainstream support expires, not when extended support expires. Mainstream support for Visual C++ ended in September, 2004. If you want to get mad at them for that 3-month gap, have at it.

Windows NT is still in use, and the exam was discontinued years ago. So? What's your point?

If you think that those certifications should still be around, then fine. I tend to agree with you. But that is not the point of Microsoft certification: it is a marketing tool for their currently supported technologies.

In truth, if certification WERE a money grab to Microsoft, they'd continue to offer the older exams and certifications. It costs them little-to-nothing to continue offering them; the exams are already created, and no new features are being added to those technologies.

DING DING DING! Now you're getting it! Certification is a marketing tool! They certify on current technologies because that's what they're selling! THAT is my point!

Eh? They're different certification tracks. They didn't create an exam and then remove it. They analyzed business requirements and decided to make a single exam in the new track.

By your logic, if popularity affected the number of exams they create, then they should have just as many (if not more) exams in the new MCITP: EA track as they had in the MCSE 2003 track, right? After all, the MCSE 2003 track is/was popular. But they don't; the MCITP: EA requires only 5 exams, whereas the MCSE 2003 track requires 7. Why fewer exams for a popular certification if it's really just a money grab?

Your logic doesn't hold. the number of exams has nothing to do with the popularity of the certifications; it has to do with the job role that Microsoft wants to focus on, and particularly so with their new certification tracks - they've come right out and stated that they're focusing more on the job role with their new exam tracks.

But they don't withdraw exams: the BI 2005 exams are STILL AVAILBLE!

After the exam is created, the cost of developing the exam has already been actualized (which they have to make back over time). The rest fo the cost is simply maintenance cost, which is covered by the majority of the exam fees. Why would they remove an exam they've already spent tons of money to develop? They don't... until the technology retires. It would make no sense to remove an exam - they've already created it.

That'd be like a practice exam provider creating a product and then removing it because it doesn't sell well. They might not advertise it anymore... but they're not gonna remove it; the cost of developing the product has been endured already. They gain a bit of their costs back with every product sold.

Your point? All of these technologies have reached the end of mainstream support.

Again, if certification just were a money grab for Microsoft, they'd still offer the old certifications, wouldn't they? There is OBVIOUSLY demand for them, as your MSDN blog link clearly shows!!

So what IS your argument? That Microsoft is running their certification program at a profit, or not offering popular exams like Visual C++? It's not logical to defend both sides of the argument; if it were a profit center, they'd continue to offer popular exams and certifications. But that's not the point of their certification program! Their program is designed to promote their CURRENT technologies - the technologies they sell - which ARE Microsoft's profit centers.

Sure, they CAN offer the C++ exam and make money off of it. And that would certainly drive more money into their certification program. But at what cost to selling new technologies? Microsoft doesn't want more people certified to support the old technologies; they want to sell their new technologies. THAT is the way they make money off certification... not from the program itself... but as the result of selling new technology, not supporting old technology.

You and I might both disagree with Microsoft in their decisions to discontinue certifications because WE, the techs and programmers, see the usefulness of being able to support the old technologies. But the bottom line is this: they don't create their certifications for us... make no mistake, they do it for themselves... not to get rich off of certifications... but to get rich off of the technologies they sell as a result of certifications. THAT is why they discontinue certifications periodically... not because they're not popular.

I hope you can see my logic... if not, that's all I got. I doubt I can spell it out any clearer for you.

 

Ok I was going to leave it but you seem to want a response so I will try to answer.

C++ is in no way outdated, it is still in use now, my view of certification does not match yours, they called it Visual C++ 6, they could have called it anything, its really just semantics and marketing. They could have done a very minimal job on the exam and kept it as Visual C++ or just made sure it was generic in the first place, microsoft do not own the C++ standard its an ANSI/ISO standard. There was never any real demand for a C++ exam because developers didn't want to take it, so they withdrew it, and did not replace it, they may be convinced to reintroduce one if they think there is demand, which there isn't.

You seem to think they run certification programs on all current product versions and retire by support date, I don't think its so clear. You can take a cert in Virtual Earth for heavens sake, but not for a language in their current product suite that 90% of their products are written in ?

C++ is not legacy, its still in their current product suite, argue all you like about how they package it up or how they argue for retirement or support. These are all commercial issues relating to marketing and therefore profit as I argued, C++ is current and has been for 15+ years now, half their products are written in it. Similarly theres no MFC cert, no Win32 cert, no ATL cert, no COM cert, no MASM cert, no DirectX cert, no XNA cert, no Silverlight cert, no Expression Blend cert, why? Not because of support, or legacy, but because the programs are marketing and finance driven. Your NT analogy is not accurate, there are/were replacement tracks on W2k, W2003 and now W2008. My point is the whole process is in fact fairly arbitary and marketing based, there is no real fixed logic to it.

Do I want these certs ? No, but then I don't see a reason for half their other certs either, like I said not everything needs a cert. The goal should be considered when creating the program and it shouldn't just be marketing, it should be does it benefit the industry professionals and employers.

Sometimes examination in line with version policy is not helpful, for that reason the 70-536 .Net 2.0 exam is still valid in the new .Net 3.5 track. I'd like to see a more educational slant to the exams and have them include more generic content like ryan hinted at with his ldap example. Maybe have core exams which are largely version agnostic, which objectives change less often and just make electives for the fancy stuff. If they tested more by role and less by product again their would be less exams.

When I say withdraw, obviously they have to follow some lifecycle or people would be caught midstream, same as when a movie bombs, it still gets screened just not for as long, they adjust the screening dates and perhaps don't rebook the director or leading actor for the next film.

Yes I can see your point, my point is I think multiple forces are at work, some educational, some marketing, some financial.

I hope you see this as a constructive debate, this is how I envisage the process.

 

Not my policy, man. Take it up with Microsoft. If you read my post, you'll see that I agree with you. Their support expired, and as they always do, they retired the exams. They simply decided not to create another certification for it, instead going forward with C#.

They want to promote Virtual Earth. Thus, they decided to create a certification (and likely created the exam at a loss, not a profit - do YOU know anyone taking that exam? I don't.).

I never said they didn't make profit off of their technologies. What I said was they don't make money directly off their certification programs.

I also never said that they aim to lose money through their certification program; their desire is to break even. There is not enough demand for those certifications for them to spend the money to develop them. As I said before, it is pretty expensive to create a certification exam. They certainly don't want to lose money.

Plus, they really don't gain any sales of technologies by creating an MFC cert, an ATL cert, a COM cert, or a MASM cert. Again, sales of technologies is where they make their real money.

...just as C# is their replacement for C++. They see C# as superior. You may not agree, but that's their decision. If you don't agree, take it up with them. I have no opinion on that issue.

Go ahead and continue to think their process is arbitrary. I can see the logic in it. They have set deadlines for support, and with rare exceptions, they stick to them. Not arbitary at all... in fact, it's quite the opposite.

Just want to make you aware of what terminology Microsoft uses... to my knowledge, they have yet to withdraw (or, more correctly, retire) an exam before it is time. They may not offer a new exam based on a technology (as with C++)... but they don't withdraw exams.

Still (and sticking to the original point of discussion), if their certification program were driven by profit... why wouldn't they continue to offer the Visual C++ 6 exam? Because it's not driven by profit. It is driven by marketing... currently, of C# .NET and VB .NET, with the most current frameworks. As time goes on, those frameworks (and the related exams) will retire as well. If Microsoft creates a new language, they'll likely move in that direction and abandon the others... over time.

Yes, there are multiple forces at work. All I'm saying is that their goal isn't to rake in money off of their certification programs... their goal is to rake in money on technologies that relate to their certifications. And they certainly do that!

 

I'll just add my 10p, if compTIA wanted to see what I used to study and test me on what I have learned and practiced then I would welcome them. The same goes for MS when I get an MS cert.

 

This is marketing again, that is a gross over simplification, C# is a high level language suitable for general business apps, thats why its marketable and suitable for certs. C++ is a system level language, suitable for device drivers, system software, operating systems, utilities.

People are moving to DSL's, C# may be superior in the one context, and C++ is superior in another. C# is not a direct replacement for C++, its more of a replacement for VB and the failed J++ if anything. C# can act as a replacement for C++ in some domains, but not all. Many people might argue that C++ should not have been used in those domains before.

Theres some interesting work going on and maybe one day C# will be a replacement for C++, however I wouldn't be confident to make that judgement now. People are working on deterministic garbage collection, reducing the demands of the CLR, writing kernels in C#, porting the CLR to other platforms, etc.

Like I said difference of opinion, my point is the logic is largely marketing based not product version or support based. Theres some agreement because the marketing also drives these other functions.

Presumably there will be some overhead to running an exam however small, if the takeup is very small then its still a loss making exam, they may choose to run some loss leaders, doesn't mean they will chose to keep running all of them, they review support lifetimes periodically, they can take a view on all factors and choose to extend or not.

Well at least we agree on something !

 

I've already mentioned this but everyone completely chose to ignore it (apart from Zimbo)

And that is what if you're accused of cheating when you haven't, are you likely to be challenged lets say with a score of 750 (you may have or may not cheated to get that score)

If you haven't and you're challenged with a few questions over the phone and under pressure there's a chance you'll get them wrong, there's even a chance if you did the full exam again you could this time fail with 680 but it doesn't mean you're a cheat the first time around

They say they will be looking at time taken to answer some questions but some questions you just know straight away, I've used the likes of the examcram books and preplogic and even with them some of the questions are very similar because there are only a limited number of ways you can ask certain questions.

How do you think you'd feel if you were WRONGLY accused of being a cheat? What failsafe measures do they have in place to prevent this. If MS accused someone of being a cheat isn't that slander/libel (always get them mixed up)

Have you ever been wrongly accused of something? I know I have and it almost ruined my life. If it's against any kind of authority of money backed business it's bloody difficult and costly to clear your name and I wouldn't wish what I went through on anyone.

 

I think its good in a way that Microsoft are trying to weed out the braindumpers, and overall this seems a fair way to do it, no system is perfect however, false positives will likely happen, and im sure legal challenges could happen, especially as realistically Microsoft will have no reliable way of proving people have used braindumps, unless people purchased braindumps on their credit cards and the charge is shown on a statement and MS somehow access that or that they demand purchase records in the form of 12 months worth of bank statements.

If they do go to those lengths then I can imagine that would get expensive for Microsoft.

 

Just got back from my first OU tutorial, and guess what sounds like they test exactly in the manner I suggested and they run 300+ distance learning courses every year.

If the OU can manage it I'm sure a company like Microsoft could manage it if they wanted.

 

Agree 100% .... getting a call and answer some questions doesn't prove anything. I am using ExamForce and Transcender and read Syngress books - all legit and none of them are braindumps... BUT: they are indeed VERY close to the real ones because as you say correclty - there are just so many ways to ask a question. Every exam I passed with above 900 ... It doesn't mean I know the technology by heart ... I don't ... I am working in a hosting company and we don't use AD .... Maybe IF a customer wants an Exchange server .. or a SQL cluster .. that is the only time I install / configure Windows DNS / AD and whatnot .. but thats it ... Ask me in a few month how to do an authoritve restore of a usergroup ... My response will be most likely

In my case I work a lot with Server 2003 / 2008 and I love it .. but I never work with AD and the only reason I even sit for the exams is because my company wants me to and gives out nice payraises when you pass. I do all the labs in the books and try to understand everything ... but the reality is : If you don't work with it on daily basis .. you most likely a paper MCTS / MCP / MCSE in the long run ... Lets face it : most, if not all Prep software / books are aimed to pass the exam, and not to understand the technology ..

I think if someone really wants to KNOW the technology then DO NOT read any exam preparation books or get the software but buy GENERIC books ... Something like "Server 2008 in a nutshell" or Active Directory related books .. THEN go for the exam ... my guess : 80% would fail ...

Speaking of false positives

http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/edu/2008/070708ed1.html?page=1

and

Makes me even a bit angry ... "based solely on statistical findings" .. not sure what to say ...

Oh, and what about bootcamps ? Do they get a call from Microsoft when they pass three exams for the SA 2008 in 7 days ? How much do you think they know about AD ? < / rant >

He, just thinking about it .. You can have again a second shot for free .. so why not going to the exam without even touching a book - see what topics you need to study - go the second time for free and pass ...

pmsl ....

 

I've answered it plenty: until it happens, there's really no need for you to stress out about it.

I'd feel badly if that were to happen... but it's not gonna happen. If they ask me questions, I know my stuff, so I have no fear of them checking to ensure that I'm not just braindumping.

No, it's not slander or libel. They aren't "calling" you anything; they can simply revoke your certifications. They don't HAVE to have proof, and they don't have to give a reason; it's THEIR certification program. They can do with it as they wish. If you don't agree with their methods (which, I will again mention, has yet to revoke the certification of someone who wasn't cheating), then by all means, stop certifying. However, I will continue to certify because I agree with their efforts.

Nope, hasn't ever happened to me, and if it ever does, then I can simply prove I know my stuff. They can ask me questions 14 different ways if they want.

 

Hey, it's Microsoft's viewpoint, not mine. Rant to them. I'm not a programmer.

Considering they have to pay Prometric and the testing center and maintain the program (Trika didn't work for free) and ship the materials AND create/maintain/update the exam, there's considerable overhead in offering an exam.

...that said, they don't withdraw exams once they're offered. Our terminology obviously differs.

 

There are only so many ways to ask a question... but as an author of practice exams (including being an author who formerly worked for Transcender), there are plenty enough ways to ask them so they are NOT "very close to the real ones". They weren't "very close" when I worked there, and Boson's aren't "very close" now. The concepts are covered, certainly... but you DO have to study to be able to pass.

Most, yes. The good ones not only prepare you for the exam, but also help you understand the technology, which ultimately makes you a better tech. I take great pride in being one of the "good ones". After all, what good is just passing a test?

Why stop there? Why get any books at all? Why not just work with the technology?

...and if that's truly how you feel, then why do YOU use exam preparation software? Do you not "really want to KNOW the technology?"

Although working with the technology is of primary importance, there is a time and a place and a reason for studying exam prep books and practice exam software... because generic books will not likely contain some of the material you need to know to pass the exam (and... incidentally, make you a better tech). So don't poo-pooh exam prep books... although you think they don't help someone to KNOW the technology, I'll have to disagree with you based on my own experiences as a network admin.

What would you want them to use to "launch enforcement actions"? Rumor and innuendo?

If/when it's discovered that they use braindumps to pass exams, then they can take action.

It seems that you're arguing both sides of the fence. DO you want Microsoft to go after braindumpers or DON'T you? If someone passes legitimately attending a bootcamp, where's your gripe? They passed legitimately. On the other hand, if someone uses braindumps when attending a bootcamp, don't you want Microsoft to use that statistical analysis to find them out, thereby preserving the integrity of your hard-earned certifications?

You can't have it both ways... arguing for protection from Microsoft's statistical analysis, then arguing about people who might have braindumped who don't get caught.

That's certainly a valid method. However, you won't likely be given the same questions the second time around. Sure, you'll know which subjects you are weak on... but you can figure that out by taking paper-based end-of-chapter tests or computer-based practice exams as you study.

 

Personally I don't stop there and personally I don't just use exam prep and books .... In my personal case I was asked to do those exams and the reason why I use exam prep software such as Transcender or ExamForce is simply that I am not working on certain topics on day to day basis ..
I never stop learning / trying to understand everything etc., but I am sure I am not the only one who has some time pressure

Don't quite get it (shoot me I am German lol )

I have sometimes the problem to express myself without people misunderstanding me
I DO want them to stop braindumps / cheater and I certain DO NOT want cheater NOT being caught (errr .. you know what I mean).

My BIGGEST concern is that someone who did not cheat or braindumped is being accused of doing so and gets banned based on those statistics .. My understanding is, that some statistics are solely based on time taken to answer a question ..

So let me give you one example I have posted on another forum :


The structure of a Microsoft question is typically made of three parts ..

1. Explanation of the environment
2. Question
3. Selection of solutions ..

So part 1. is just waste of time and can mostly be skipped ... All I am interested in is part 2. and 3.

IF part 2. doesn't make any sense .. I can still go back to part 1. and read about the environment...

For example :

1. You are administrator who loves coffee and you have colleagues who don't even know what's ping.

2. You need to configure the DNS server on a Server 2008 core server. How'd you do it.

a) netsh interface ipv4 set dnsbollocks
b) netsh interface ipv4 add dnsserver
c) netsh interface ipv4 set dnsbollocks
d) netsh interface ipv4 set dnsbollocks

Flying over the question took 2 seconds ... figuring out that three commands out of four are plain wrong another 2 seconds and ticking the right questions and hit another 2 ... 1 second for 'Next' ...


So this question, with eventuall a long text is answered correctly in under 10 seconds ...



Statisticly I could be a cheater because I answered a question in like 4 seconds ..... or am I ???

Yes and no ...

Depends on the topic ...

I don't want to say which exam obviously .. but one exam had 58 questions .... I failed it on the first try (there are NO study guides for this one) .. I read up on some topics I was weak in .. went for the re-take two weeks later and had EXACTLY the same questions (and passed with 987).
A colleague of mine went for the same exam as we required two MCTS' for this topic .. when he came back (and passed) we talked about it (not before as I didn't even know he goes for it) - for the questions we talked about it appeared he got the exact same set ...

I think it simply depends on how popular the exams are (in this case there were like 60 world wide at the time I took it) .. In this case it appears there only exists one set with 58 questions - period .. what are the odds that I get the same set twice and he the exact same ?

I took another exam and failed and at least 80&#37; of the questions were identical ..

But this was discussed in other threads to the death but hopefully you know what i mean

 

Bosonmichael, I think you're looking at things too simplistically. As I posted, I guess it depends on just how they deem you may have 'cheated' . If it's down to timings then surely couldn't mistakes be made. If they checked those getting near on 100&#37; is that really possible using brain dumps (do they actually cover all questions in the pool or not)

And for your comments regarding questions being very similar not being the case. I've used preplogic numerous times before and come across almost identical questions that as soon as I've seen them I've known the answer (I've still double checked to ensure I'm right and it's the same answer)

I'm all for methods to root out the cheats BUT and it's a big but fals positives are a worry. I've passed a couple of my exams with scores of less than 800. If I get a phone call out of the blue and get asked 3 or 4 questions who's to say I'll get all or some correct, especially if they're as rambling as typical MS questions. It doesn't make me a cheat though.