Microsoft Certification and Technology FAQs

Three weeks ago, Microsoft announced it had wrapped up work on Vista SP2, and had slapped a "release to manufacturing" label on the code. At the time, although a Microsoft spokeswoman confirmed that Vista SP2 had been handed to computer makers -- who would presumably install it on new PCs sold between now and when Windows 7 ships -- she had no idea when TechNet and MSDN subscribers would be given the upgrade.

According to the TechNet download site, Microsoft posted Vista SP2 disk images for both the 32- and 64-bit versions last Friday, May 14. Microsoft has consistently only promised Vista SP2 before the end of the second quarter, which would mean a deadline before the end of June. A company spokeswoman repeated that today. "We don't have any additional information to share outside of what we've said previously -- second quarter of 2009," she said in an e-mail reply to questions about the company's silence on Vista's second service pack.

It's not surprising that Microsoft hasn't trumpeted Vista SP2's availability, or rushed it to the public. Even high-level executives have recently taken to putting Vista on a virtual trash heap.

Last week, for example, Bill Veghte, the senior vice president for Windows, told companies and organizations to drop Vista deployment plans "if you're just starting your testing" and instead "switch over and do your testing on the [Windows 7] Release Candidate." Microsoft delivered Windows 7 Release Candidate (RC) to the public on May 4, and may have it ready to sell as early as October.

Users now running Vista SP1 will see an offer to download and install SP2 on Windows Update at some point, Microsoft has said. Reports have speculated that Microsoft will flip the switch either next week or the first week of June.

While TechNet, MSDN subscribers get SP2 upgrade, execs talk up Windows 7

Microsoft has cancelled plans to hold a face-to-face hearing with European antitrust authorities and rivals scheduled for the first week of June, claiming it wouldn't get a fair audience because senior E.U. officials will be absent."We believe that holding the hearing at a time when key officials are out of the country would deny Microsoft our effective right to be heard and hence deny our 'rights of defense' under European law," said Dave Heiner, Microsoft's vice president and deputy general counsel .Microsoft requested an oral hearing last month when it submitted its formal written response to accusations by the European Commission, Europe's top antitrust authority, that it broke antitrust laws by bundling its Internet Explorer (IE) Web browser in with the Windows operating system.The Commission proposed June 3-5 for the hearing but Microsoft late Thursday said the dates clash with an annual competition law conference in Zurich, Germany, attended by the most senior Commission antitrust officials.It asked for a different date but this request was denied, according to Microsoft.The Commission wasn't immediately available to comment.The software giant's excuse for cancelling is "ludicrous," said Thomas Vinje, the legal representative of Opera, a rival browser maker whose complaint to the Commission in 2007 sparked the new antitrust case against Microsoft.Top officials don't show up to individual case hearings, Vinje said. "Such people simply don't attend, and Microsoft knows it," he said in an e-mail to IDG early Friday. He concluded that Microsoft is "afraid of facing the questions and evidence" from the Commission and from those aligned against it, including not only Opera but also Mozilla, maker of Firefox and Microsoft's nearest rival in the browser market in Europe; Google, maker of the Chrome browser; security software maker Symantec; and industry groups the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA), the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS), and the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE).In January the Commission accused Microsoft of distorting fair competition in the market for Internet browsers by tying IE to Windows which, it argued, gives IE an advantage over rival browsers.

The case is similar to one focussed on IE in the U.S. launched under the final Clinton administration, which was then dropped under the first administration of George W. Bush in favor of a broader antitrust suit in which Microsoft was charged, and later found guilty of, illegally thwarting competition in order to extend its operating system monopoly

It also echoes a previous legal challenge to Microsoft in Europe in 2004, when the Commission ruled that tying Media Player, software that plays video and music tracks, into Windows was illegal for the same reason bundling IE is. It ordered Microsoft to launch a second version of Windows that had the media player stripped out. However, this remedy is widely seen as being useless, largely because it didn't insist on the unbundled version of the OS being sold at a lower price than the one equipped with Media Player.This time the Commission is considering forcing Microsoft to include rival browsers inside Windows. The idea would be to give users a genuine choice between browsers. This so-called "must carry" remedy is broadly supported by the rival browser makers. However, some are worried about the precise wording, arguing that if the Commission isn't careful, its remedy could replace Microsoft's near monopoly with an equally harmful Microsoft/Google duopoly.Microsoft itself has made similar arguments, warning that the 'must carry' remedy would allow Google to pay manufacturers for presence inside PCs, instead of paying Opera and Firefox for default search engine status on their browsers."The proposed remedy could enhance Google's dominance in the lucrative market for Internet search, and force other browsers that currently depend on revenues from Google out of business," said one person close to Microsoft who asked not to be named.

Despite the value of an MCSE or similar industry qualification, 88% of UK women wouldn't consider a career in technology, according to research carried out by Firebrand Training. They see the industry as being 'boring' and 'uninspiring', demanding extensive technical training, especially for courses such as Microsoft's MCSE, MCSA or MCP accreditations, the de facto Microsoft certifications.

The survey of 150 recent female graduates, showed that 132 would choose a job in management consultancy, marketing or teaching as their first or second choice. Only six of those polled would consider IT, and none had even heard of the MCSE. Those questioned said that they don't find a career in technology attractive because there is no call for skills such as team working, strategic thinking or creativity. Instead, the belief is that a role in IT is dull and monotonous, requiring only the highly technical knowledge, such as of Server Administrators working with Windows Server 2003 or 2008.

"The general perception that an IT career cannot not live up to women's professional expectations is not true", said Robert Chapman, co-founder of Firebrand Training.

"The industry is missing out on an enormous pool of talent because it is not doing enough to uncover the hidden truth of what a tech career is really like", he continued. "Positions such as project manager demand strong teamworking and management capabilities, a technology consultant requires highly strategic thinking, while a programmer must have creative skills. These are all areas in which women have continually proved their strength."

"The onus is on companies to reverse this problem and raise awareness of what a job in IT really involves. The industry is at the forefront of British business, and a number of women have found a career in this space to be exciting and challenging."