Dear all,

I'm a Linux user since 2000. I'm very happy with the Penguin. I can work, listen music, watch videos, write docs, chat, and all the stuff I can imagine with it. That's great!

Now, I'm not an administrator and I don't need to use a lot of commands in the shell. This can be a pity, but I'm not going to die anyway.
In those offices in which I worked and that are using Linux, there was no need to use shell commands. I mean...do you want a new hardware? Ok, I'll check which hardware is supported from that distro and go and buy it.
Need a software? RPM and DEB are there to help you. Distro like SUSE and Mandrake are simply easy to use. Backup are important too. But also easy to do. Other tasks can be done via GUI.

Now I checked for Linux certifications. I found LPI and started studying. I discovered that was hard. Simply too hard. I know that the good administrator should know that stuff. I don't want to say this stuff sucks. I just want to say that, in my opinion, those little-middle companies switching to linux are doing this because:

- Linux is free;
- Linux does not crash like Windows;
- Linux is 100000000000 times safer than Windows;
- Linux has it all. You need a software, Linux has it;

Yes, they need a person who is there to teach the others where to save this .doc file coming out from OpenOffice, how to install Skype, etc.
But, c'mon, does it need the LPI certification knowledge to do this?

Why is there not a certification for normal Linux users? I mean a certification for people that can help simply to switch from windows, installing a fresh distro, doing normal administration, etc.

In my opinion Linux is going to be successful if we can install it and teach it. Even if we don't know bash!

I know that this will not sound good to you, but what do you think about? Am I too lazy to learn or maybe I'm a little bit right?
If you're interested, let's start with the Normal Penguins Certification Ok, we can even change the name if you like

Fabio

In my opinion certifications should be hard or they don't mean anything. Why shell out money to prove you can work your way around a Linux environment to a relatively decent degree, when you can just state that on your resume?

The more people who can attain your certification, the less important that certification is.

Why would a normal user need a certification just to show they can do those things? I would think certifications are to show you have advanced skills as an administrator or something and are unnecessary for people just doing "basic" things.

Maybe I didn't explain very well. English is not my language.

A Normal Penguins Certification would not mean money wasting. Can everyone install Linux? I think 0,5% of people you meet in the street can. You say basic tasks. A backup is not basic at all for a non expert! So wich is the thing that makes you an expert?

We should give non expert people the chance to learn Linux, being certified and then give others this knowledge.
Ms Office teaches. Their courses are ridicoulus, but then they are expert and companies want them, just them.

A boss has the right to know that you know what Office is even if your knowledge of it is ridicoulus. Why have we only to be genius? I mean a basic certification, not a system administrator certification

And yes, you all are right. But what I'm talkin about is not the IBM, but small companies with not more than 30 persons (that is millions).

Ok, if you really need an expert, LPI and those certifications are good. But I think our community is loosing time trying to be too much sharp.

I think what may be being eluded to here is what is widely available in UK Colleges - ECDL (European Computer Driving License) which is simply a qualification that enables employers to know that staff, or potential staff have a level of proficiency with computers.

The thing is that this course is taught using MS Office products, some file management (Windows Explorer), some theory, and some internet/email usage. I am a college lecturer in computing but am unaware of any college delivering this using Linux and say Open Office, though technically the certifying body (BCS) permits this as it does not stipulate that MS Products be used.

So really, I think that while this would be a nice idea, the demand is just not currently here!!! I think it is a bit of a chicken and egg situation - which comes first the training or the demand. I think many more small and large offices would have to switch to Linux before a more general entry level qualification certifying standard user competence would be offered. Not only that, how many Computing Lecturers know how to use Linux!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great,

I wanted just to mean what you have just written. A basic certification for Linux does not exist, this is the point. If it will exist, it will be better for all. I see no disadvantages. I think out there there are loads of guys wanting to take such a certification. Linux can be funny. Bash is not funny.

You say egg and chicken. Yes, I agree. But, think a moment...if we only could offer a certification covering these arguments:

- switching from MS to Linux with SUSE and Mandriva;
- choosing the hardware less annoying;
- installing a distro;
- learning at least Open Office, The Gimp or Inkscape, NVU, Firefox, Kmail and few other things;
- doing a backup;
- build a network and connect to the internet;
- the ability to teach others this stuff;
- staying update with the new distros;
- probelms solving.

This stuff can be considered a living chicken. We don't need another egg.

Would be so complicated? Someone is saying, why to be certified for this stuff. The answer is simple: because a priori no one knows if you can or not.

If someone is interested, then drop me an e-mail at fabioriccisit(at)yahoo.it.
We could also talk of this project to some school out there. i think in Basel, Switzerland (just to say where I live) there are schools ready to talk of this.