Ars Technica | Silicon Shecky

Google’s Bradley Horowitz recently announced that Google+ will be accepting Nicknames and Pseudonyms. Considering other changes, is Google+ drowning?

People from day one have been asking for anonymity on Google+ and now Google has a few ways to hide your real name from the world. At least that is how it seems. With the announcement a couple of friends tried setting up nicknames. And while they could add them into their profile, they couldn’t change the name that people saw. Hopefully that portion just hasn’t rolled out yet.

The Pseudonym Policy on the other hand will require some verification. The methods could be rather arbitrary as they say the will require either real world or online verification of some sort. The arbitrary nature of the verification process is where I see problems coming in. The other question is what should be a nickname and what a Pseudonym?

Finally, Google is forcing people to sign up for Google+ when they get any of Google’s services. While we all know that this is a sure fire way to artificially increase the numbers for Google+, there is another problem with this. The naming policy, unless you get an approved pseudonym, requires real information such as your full name. This limits the usefulness of Gmail as an anonymous e-mail account. Not only that, but it could drive people to picking up Yahoo or Hotmail accounts again. Forcing people to sign up for a service they don’t want and will not use is a bad business decision on any company’s part. It really makes you wonder if Google+ is drowning in its own hype.

Right now I am taking a wait and see approach. I have a Google+ account already, and I do have a Google+ page set up for SiliconShecky, which eventually I will find a tool that will post my articles to Google+ like I post to twitter automatically. Also check out this article from Ars Technica for more information.

I am a geek. I post here, I twitter, I read a number of tech sites. I also am a Network Engineer and have Microsoft certifications. Oh yeah, I have the CompTIA A+ and Network+ Certifications. I went with the CompTIA certifications because of the standard they are. They are entry level, and never need to be renewed, or at least that was the case for all but a few days this year.

While going through my tech news this morning, Ars Technica had an article up titled, “ Thought that A+ cert was good for life? Think again.” It talks about how CompTIA was making the entry level certifications renewable, and making it retroactive. Yes, you would have to pay a yearly fee to keep the certification plus do continuing education or take the exam over again every three years. Also if you had originally been certified over 3 years ago, you would have to take the newest version of the exam to get recertified.

The announcement was originally made back on January 11, 2010. The geek world went ballistic. Discussions on forum after forum popped up. Grass roots organizations started on Facebook. Finally, Ars Technica got a hold of the info and posted it. The embers of discontent were fanned into an even larger fire. CompTIA has backed down and made adjustments to when changes would occur.

The question is, how much has it hurt CompTIA in the computer world. Yes they are honoring the Lifetime Certifications as valid again, plus if you get the certification before the end of 2010 it will be lifetime still. The new rules take effect Jan 1, 2011.

The dropping of the ball on this was two fold. First off, CompTIA gave no forewarning that they were thinking of changing the terms of the 3 certifications (A+, Network+, Security+). The surprise factor of the announcement would have caused a large ruckus anyway, but then you had to add factor 2. They were revoking thousands, if not millions of people’s certifications. One of the first certifications most people get is the A+, because it shows a basic knowledge of the computer world. All of a sudden, the agreement we had signed saying we were getting a lifetime certification was null and void.

Don’t get me wrong, I can’t complain that they would make the exams renewable. It makes sense. Think of the people who will pass the A+ and then never use it. It is time for it to loose the lifetime certification. Cisco, Microsoft, and most of the other certifications out there expire and have to be upgraded or renewed. Time frames differ, but it makes sense. CompTIA though went about it the wrong way. CompTIA deals with enough certifications that it will survive this. The question is, will the exams affected by this PR disaster survive, and will CompTIA be looked at differently for a long time, or will this just pass into oblivion?