Google IT Support Professional Certificate(blog.google) |
Google IT Support Professional Certificate(blog.google) |
Money would be better spent on a respectable certification like MCSE.
Sure, they both might be true but they aren't all attainable for everyone.
Udacity degrees, certifications or whatever they're called are GEDs of certifications and should be treated as such.
If you want an actual job where you will be respected at, don't go to udacity.
When I got my CompTIA Security+ in college, I got asked by interviewers why I got that and not the CISSP. The answer is, while the CISSP is a far more respected certification, the requirements and entry price are also far different. The CISSP is not an entry-level certification, it actually mandates a certain number of years in the industry.
MTA is entry-level. MCSA is entry level. MCSE is for established professionals, it is an expert-level certification, so of course it's more respected. The people taking it are already well-respected experts themselves.
The MTA is the Microsoft certification that's most comparable to this. Not MCSE.
The problem is boot camps. When you can pay $5k and have the answers drilled into your head for a week, of course anyone can pass.
I checked out some of the material a bit further through the course as well, and I cannot recommend it for anyone serious about the profession. It looks good on the surface (reading the course summaries and the objectives), but the quality just isn't there.
Personally, I don't have a high opinion of anyone whose only stated qualifications are these sorts of certifications --- all it really shows is rote memorisation, when good IT support relies on creative and insightful problem-solving skills --- including being good at... Googling.
- The Coursera Team
It is also a great path into technology for those who did get CS degrees from a top school.
Side note: In the video, all the Google VPs and Leads were sitting in bright offices. The IT staff sat in dark rooms with little or no windows. @2min mark, the IT staff look to be in a dungeon at night.
I eventually interviewed successfully to become a SWE, but my experiences working with the broader swath of people (not just CS/CE grads from elite programs) in IT really opened my perspective on technology, products, and the diverse set of people and talents it takes to make an organization function.
I have no connection to this certificate effort (I moved into development eons ago), but I think that the opportunity for exposure to a technology profession that this program offers could be the foot in the door for a lot of people, regardless of their background.
[1] https://careers.google.com/jobs#t=sq&q=j&li=20&l=false&jlo=e...
That's a decent salary for a Windows or network admin in middle America. Helpdesk positions are lucky to pay half that.
I just shared this course with our support team. They’re great at product support and know it inside and out, but can be lacking on the IT side which is where I generally have to get involved.
This course looks promising.
It's unfortunate that the company's external support has such a bad reputation. But our internal support team is actually highly regarded and loved by employees. The training here is very much based on the training we provide to our internal hires.
When each compute node becomes essentially a disposable quantity, what does that do to the value of the people who service them?
People will say "What about networking?", as though locality makes a difference here. I've seen so many local network deployments where a guy in India configures the switch and firewall, then mails them over here and pays a local guy who is practically illiterate $75 for half a day's work to mount and plug everything in. They may have to go back-and-forth for several attempts since local guy is a hot mess. Even so, at $75 a pop the economics still work out.
There would be a dozen contractors in the room. They discuss who works on what in the morning, then the network is down and noone can do anything for half the day.
I think Coca-cola is a reputable company (probably, I'm sure someone knows some dark secret I haven't read about), but I wouldn't assume a Cisco networking certification from them is reputable.
Now with that said, a "job" consisting of these skillsets is more of a TIER III/IV in IT Support, but can serve as entry level experience for DevOps for CS or engineering functionaries (CS grads and self taught).Especially someone like me who already has technical IT experience and it is a requirement that I am versed in at least one scripting language and some automation scripts and tools.
My advice....this certificate was formulated as a gateway to DevOps, technical support, not "IT Support," in the traditional sense. You won't receive calls about not being able to retrieve emails, paystubs, lost files, identity management and access. However, if an internal company app or the companies software product is buggy, that's where you start. "Back-end IT Support" would be more accurate.
Less than 10 years ago I was hired to do a job that was 80% mindnumbingly boring. (Think copy and paste to Excel.)
I was paid well above the USD50' that is mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
There was a team of us with widely different background and I think only me and one other had degrees in IT.
One of my colleagues came straight from a job as taxi driver (got hired after talking to someone in the company while driving him to the airport).
In case anyone wonders: he turned out to be really good.
I've been writing code for over 15 years and have seen more than enough opportunity to expand my business into the IT side of things, a lot more than contract coding anyway. I've let these opportunities go by as I don't have any real qualifications although I reckon I could cobble enough together with my experience to get by.
That being said, if I get a cert' from this it might be the confidence to push my business further if nothing else.
EdX seems quite Microsoft heavy.
But Google has released a lot of material on Udacity, and they have other connections (Thrun).
Just curious.
Is this why IBM, DXC et al are laying off Western workers like it’s going out of fashion and offshoring those jobs as fast as they possibly can?
For some reason I thought the general trend lately was many Western countries were bringing support jobs back to their own countries.
I think going forward the hiring would be at best replacing people who joined in 80s in case those jobs are not totally automated away.
Tonyour side note, the help desks (we call them Techstops) are anything but a dungeon :) you can image search for "Google Techstop" and get a very representative view of what they tend to look like.
My college classes were programming C++, physics, calculus, and hardware architectures. Barely anything to do with IT.
A lot of people in my class dropped out of the CS program because they had confused the two.
I really think we should rename “computer science” to “computing science” or “computational science” - just please get the word “computer” out of there.
It's become more of a SWE org everywhere.
It's funny because SWE peeps get really defensive about IT vs SWE roles; like they don't want to be associated with IT for some ego-related reason.
More free, open source platforms that are powerful and free but just need some configuration, customization and support.
Developing getting simpler to becoming just config anyway. We're already seeing this, you dont need to know anything about pointers any more, just hooking up libraries.
IT support will ALWAYS be required though. Unless we build some kind of AI that can diagnose issues like humans do... after which they will all become obsolete. But I don't see that happening in the next 50 years.
Hardware continues to be more reliable, more integrated, and cheaper. For most office jobs something like Chrome OS or iOS would be sufficient.
Disclosure: I worked on this program.
I rip on google a lot, but I can appreciate good work when I see it.
This course seems to be pretty comparable, but it also covers writing Ruby code, managing Chef, and using Git.
Of course another big difference is this course teaches you exactly what you need to know, while CompTIA leaves it to third-parties to write the training materials independently from the courses, so you're reading a 500 page book for a 100 question exam.
This program was literally started so Google could provide tech support to its employees. A highly technical group with access to a leading public cloud. None of that does away with the need to provide IT support.
maybe the office will finally go paperless this decade, and a couple of those will go away. they'll just be some new IoT fuckery to contend with.
Or Azure or AWS I just mention Google stuff because this is their thing
There's no good reason not to, since if your security and auditing systems are correctly implemented, limited-permission DB users doing direct SQL have the same security and accountability as someone using a specialized app.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/26/world/union-says-coca-cola...
=D
When someone comes along with an official "I can MongoDB certified architect" certificate issued by Mongo themselves, it's a good talking point during an interview, but we don't consider it a credential in itself.
There's no way to vet every arbitrary corporate certificate that comes through the door; we don't know if it's the result of a rigorous apprenticeship, 1000-question exam, a practical and 10 years of industry experience or a couple YouTube videos and a questionnaire. We don't know if the standards changed with management; what used to be impossible to attain is now printed like money. We don't know if the way Coca-cola teaches students to do things complies with best practices or industry standards, or just with Coca-cola's vision for how things should be done (which is absolutely what I'd expect from an entity like Google, who has demonstrated this in other avenues of influence).
Equifax could have printed certifications. Until recently, they were a reputable name. Would you trust an information security certificate issued by them now?
There is no accountability with corporate certifications. You're advocating faith-based hiring by trading on name alone.
Everyone familiar with Cisco's certificates knows the CCIE is really hard to get because you have to actually demonstrate competence at fixing broken networking in a complex environment. Which leads to an interesting point. It is effectively a work product assessment. If someone can get a CCIE they can probably wrangle your network architecture too. It is similar to how we hire folks. OSCP is similar in that there is a practical part to their certifications. You have to demonstrate actual competence to get one of their various certs.
Contrast to CEH/CISSP you just multiple choice a bunch of facts. Literally, almost anyone, could sit down and cram for 4-6 weeks and get a CISSP. Even people that don't know much about how technology and computing works. Tests like the Bar exam also go far beyond multiple choice, having essay components and very complex questions in most cases.
I think it boils down to a simple thing: do enough people who know about the certificate and how difficult it is to acquire say it is actually difficult and or practical in a meaningful way. Equifax could have crafted such a certificate and it certainly would have been a blow to certificate holders if it was a good certificate with a convincing practical setup like OSCP or CCIE. The rough heuristic I always hear is what you said "Certs are garbage" -- someone else will pipe up, well I guess OSCP is alright, etc.
More than half a decade ago I was hired out of an internship at a fairly average company doing fairly average work in a mid-sized Midwestern city making $51k/yr. I was 23 and the internship was the only IT experience I had.
So take an anecdote as an anecdote... it's not always true across the board.
If the trend continues there will be more configuration/customization roles in higher languages and fewer Python level devs too.
Disclosure: I worked on this program and went through Google's IT Residency Program.
If this course is based on this view of the IT Support role (which I heartily approve of, but which is not the baseline norm in the industry) it really should be called the IT Support Engineering Professional Certificate or something similar, because otherwise it won't communicate it's real focus either to applicants or, perhaps more critically, hiring officers.
If anything, that's the weirdest thing, Google's doing an IT cert? Are they teaching Microsoft platforms and being useful, or are they trying to teach Google's Chrome management platform that nobody uses? If Google's willing to hire graduates, it presumably teaches Google's IT stack... which isn't remotely similar to the IT stack people will find in other companies.
And Microsoft has been pushing businesses increasingly toward technologies like Powershell and products like SCCM in the past decade. The trend is slower in the Microsoft world, but it's definitely toward automation taking on the type of work you'd traditionally have support techs running around handling.
Both are true: even ten years ago, there was a noticeable split between helpdesk and maintenance skills, and things that we might now call "DevOps". If you have hundreds or thousands of computers, you can end up with people who specialize in stuff like building packages and disk images for deployments, writing scripts for user account management, and other automation, and don't fix printers so much any more, even if they don't have a separate job title.
80% of traditional IT hocus pocus can be automated or performed by an office manager or admin.
Then you clearly have never worked at a business where IT or technology isn't a core function of the business. Middle America wasn't and still isn't ready for understanding IT. I say this as someone who has worked with over 150 companies (mainly mid market, middle america) doing IT audits.
Software engineering, or maybe CS, is what I wanted. I hadn't even heard the phrase "computer science" when I started university. The total incompetence of the course counselors at the core function of their job contributed to putting me on a path that eventually lead to the ruin of my life.
I did a degree that claimed to contain software development, but was in the IT category - I never learned of the concept of version control (at all), how to use makefiles, exception blocks, performance profiling, or a bunch of other practical stuff.
Now I'm wasting away in an IT support job. I can't blame everything on that, and most of the responsibility for where I am today is on me - especially for not turning it around better after I realised my mistakes, but I feel like the confusion between "IT", "CS", and "Software engineering" definitely kickstarted a path that wasted alot of my most valuable learning time.
Don't trust course counselors - or other people in general.
I was once in your shoes. Same background, same regrettable life choices, same potential future.
If you want to develop, do it. Start by looking at the crap software your company likely pays hundreds of thousands of dollars for and think about how you could do it better. Start by actually trying to supplant it with something of your own creation.
I have a generic degree. All those "practical" things you lament missing out on, I learned by just doing it. But I never had cause to learn what big-o notation was or how to navigate a b-tree...you know, that non-practical knowledge a CS degree would have endowed me with. The lack of such has only stopped me from working at Google. Plenty of other shops are not in the business of recruiting only those who can write the freshest sorting algorithms.
Just don't spend the rest of your life in a job you hate, condemning yourself for being put upon. It takes little effort to invoke large changes.
Some of the best developers, DBAs, system engineers, etc, I've hired had history degrees, math degrees, journalism, EE, etc. The degree itself, for me, is just proof that you finished something important. I care more about what you know, and how well you can learn something new.
I don't think I'm that unique in this respect. The tech shops I've worked in over my career were full of non-CS degreed people. Mostly my experience here, though, is with non tech companies. Things like the IT departments in Healthcare, Travel, Automotive, etc.
I... think it's not so much a matter of 'trust' as you have to understand what people understand. My understanding is that their job is to help you navigate academia, and I'm sure they are competent at that. I can't imagine how they could be good at figuring out what you want to do. That's hard enough to do yourself.
The other thing about higher education is that it's usually not meant as vocational. Now, I'm in IT too, and for that matter, I didn't go to college, so maybe I don't know anything, but my impression is that a good school is about giving you a common intellectual and cultural background, not about actually teaching you how to do your job.
This is to say, after your undergrad, you should be prepared to learn how to do a job that requires a degree, and how to communicate with others who have gone through the same training.
(Personally, I am a little confused as to just what you learn in an "IT" degree; as far as I can tell, they don't give you much math, and on a personal level, the only people I've worked with who had 'IT' type degrees were management.)
Stateside too. I used to get asked to fix printers by friends and associates and in general get treated like a help desk by people all the time because all they know is "Dave works with computers" even when I started working directly with managing software development teams later in my career.
Heck, about 16 years ago when I was working the help desk in a call center I had someone ask me "Hey IT Guy why isn't the water fountain working?" as I was walking out the door. I asked her to wait a moment, poked my head into the office of the facilities maintenance manager and asked him if he could help out.
For some reason that last bit was especially insulting, both being called "IT Guy" instead of being greeted at bare minimum by name, and for the assumption that I somehow knew how water fountains work. I was a frustrated and angry young man then, heh.
Feels good nowadays when people ask what I do "Security and Compliance". I don't get asked to fix printers anymore.
"Hi, I'm Luke, and I fix things."
Not sure why your experience was so different? Sounds like you got a raw deal though.
There are plenty of things AWS doesn't work for.
AWS works better and cheaper for almost everything that involve more than a rack of hardware.
Edit: This obviously is super variable. If you have a low load worldwide need AWS will win. Or rapid bursts of traffic. Or hundreds of other scenarios where it makes sense. It is not a one size fits all solution though.
Now take, for example, a legal firm. One of the major LOB vendors in this space has a product that only runs on Oracle on Windows, with an extremely snowflake-like build. You can call them a dinosaur, but since they are a legal firm that wants to be competitive they will use this product.
Supporting this product involves a somewhat constant string of repairs, involving things like "logon to a user desktop and reregister DLLs". It takes a helpdesk team to run these things. The new "cloud" edition is literally a Microsoft RDS server that you run on premises, and on which you run the client software. Thereby facilitating remote access, making it a "cloud" product.
Do we argue that legal firms don't matter because soon every company will soon just be a development team? I don't think that's feasible.
Yet it wasted about $2-2.5M in hardware value alone. That’s not free, especially when you wouldn’t be incurring cost on a pay by drink cloud model.