This week's book giveaway is in the OCMJEA forum. We're giving away four copies of OCM Java EE 6 Enterprise Architect Exam Guide and have Paul Allen & Joseph Bambara on-line! See this thread for details.
I know it is will be a messy post. Let me just ask these and hope that no explanation is needed:
- Apart from the discussion of whether the cert. is worth, how do you see the future of enterprise architecture compared to implementation roles, design roles and assembling roles (role of those who just stick and amalgamate the ready code together to make a product...)
- Are there alternatives to SCEA for example is there a Microsoft Software Architect exam and how is it compared to SCEA? In other words, if you are an SCEA, and someone asks you for a solution, you build up the solution with the logos you have in Java world, but there are other worlds out there...
how do you see the future of enterprise architecture compared to implementation roles, design roles and assembling roles (
Enterprise architecture is more about the 'big picture' - aligning business and IT. The 'EA' in SCEA is about J2EE's applicability across the enterprise, and not about the "enterprise architecture" it self. The role of Enteprise Architect will be above the application architect, and more akin to CIO/CTO. This is where one would deal with a more abtract representation of the architecture, and seek business value.
Are there alternatives to SCEA for example is there a Microsoft Software Architect exam and how is it compared to SCEA? You answered your own question in some sense. SCEA is about architecting enteprise solutions using Java language and J2EE platform. It certifies your competence and your ability to understand different tools offered by the J2EE platform and apply them wisely, judiciously and aptly. MCA, although from Microsfot, is surprisingly not about any Microsoft technology. It quizzes you on some qualities every architect is expected to demonstrate, including abstract thinking and communication. I personally have come to value MCA a bit higher than SCEA because of the broad scope included in the certification criteria. [ March 25, 2008: Message edited by: Ajith Kallambella ]
Open Group Certified Distinguished IT Architect. Open Group Certified Master IT Architect. Sun Certified Architect (SCEA).
Joined: Jul 05, 2005
About 25% of MCA objectives require MS technology knowledge.
It'll be strange if somebody can be a "MCA", without any MS technology knowledge.
Originally posted by Kengkaj Sathianpantarit: Please search about MCA (Microsoft Certified Architect) program.
MCA is far more difficult than SCEA.
I think it goes beyond being "more difficult" - it's more expensive, more involved... I was going to say that I don't know that there's an MCA option for software developers, but a look at their site shows an option for 'solution program' that might well encompass software development. As it involves an interview and presentation, I'd have to say that one ought better know their stuff well - it isn't something that would involve a simple fix and resubmission. Their requirements are higher, comparatively, as well.
I also don't know what the acceptance is among employers, given how new it is. As of January, there's only 66 'solution program' architects, and a grand total of fewer than 200 across all their architect programs.
Another option might well be the Open Group's IT Architect Certification. I haven't looked too deeply into this (I think my SCEA is sufficient for now ), but there's information at the site I linked in.
Theodore Jonathan Casser
SCJP/SCSNI/SCBCD/SCWCD/SCDJWS/SCMAD/SCEA/MCTS/MCPD... and so many more letters than you can shake a stick at!
Farbod H Foomany
Joined: Feb 29, 2008
Thank you all, I remember trying to find out about MCA some time ago, and the impression I still carry is that it is impossible to get MCA in practice! Am I right?
My other point is that, the architect suggests technology and these people are asked about: why Oracle ADF and not JSF, why Java and not .NET, why Apache-Tomcat not IIS? and I think a little bit of comparative knowledge is very useful. I believe that for many applications IIS works well enough...