I passed the IBM 399 test yesterday with a paltry score of 70%. I never expected the test to be so difficult. I scored the same in the pre-assesment sample test(Ironically same section scores too ). But the real test was not even close in difficulty level compared to the sample test.
Here are some tips about the test: 1. Don't expect that the test will be easy. 2. Study JSR 168 specs and pay close attention to the lines which are superscripted by roman numerals. The exam expects you to know the API and how to use it. 3. Spend some time preparing on Credential Vault, Co-Operative Portlets(wiring etc. ) and Portlet Services. This section 5 of the exam (Back-end Portlet Services) was the most difficult section for me. The reason could be that I have no work exp with credential vault etc.
I studied for nearly 1-2 hrs a day for 15-20 days.If you have been developing portlets and will spend some time on section 5 and JSR 168, passing the test will not be a problem.
Originally posted by Miguel Vieira Ferreira: Last week I did the teste and I got 86%. A tip : study a lot JSR 168 because it almost a half of the test Miguel IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Portal V5.1
Congratulations! Can you please post some useful tips/links that you used for preparation.
Hi All, I too cleard the test with 72% score.Test was not as easy it is expected to be.Test has overwhelming questions w.r.t JSR 168 ways of coding.Some tips apart from the above posts : > Concentrate on trouble shooting section in the infocenter for both Portal and RAD 6.0 > Question about RAD 6.0 are few. > Cooperative portlets,portlet wiring,elements in WSDL file etc > Enhancements to struts w.r.t portal integration
hi all, i also have planned to give this 399 test. can any one please tell me where can i find some usefull study material apart from ibm radbook..and can you guys send me some sample questions? your help will be highly appreciated. thanks in advance.
I think Mithun Chakravarthy had refreshed an years old post which is not suggestable and welcomed here in JavaRanch.
In fact i was also about to reply as the way we tend to do in an interest soon after looking at a thread but not the other associated details. But just i was cautious and aware, could find out that the original post was made on October 31st 2005.