Certification Update and Small Survey

We are almost locked on our Visual Studio 2010 and .NET Framework 4.0 certification track.  Lots of discussions around this internally and a potential change in the landscape.  At this point in time, it’s looking like the MCPD track will change and exam 70-536 will not move forward.  That means there will not be a prerequisite for the MCTS developer exams.   That’s about all I can offer into that picture for the time being.

My second reason for posting today is a small survey.  Now multiple choice but simply a question asking for your input on something.  Free form.

Question: What does the term Enterprise Application Developer or Enterprise Developer mean to you?


Looking forward to your answers.


Comments (61)

  1. Ravi says:

    – Understands whole lifecycle of a product : Analysis/Specs, Development, Test, Package & Deploy & Maintenance

    – Can choose a technology based on scale, security, performance, schedule, resources

    – Can develop a robust product (Layered architecture, Unit tests etc)

    – Doesnt know all the technologies in depth, but can ask the right questions to arrive at the right solution

    – Keeps up with the newer technologies and utilizes them to achieve savings for the enterprise

  2. WOW!

    Quick response Ravi.

    Thanks for that feedback!


  3. Geoff says:

    Very much as above.

    You understand when to use Enterprise Level Solutions/Patterns, like messaging and distributed application, if Biztalk is appropriate.

    You are able to produce high throughput, highly reliant systems.

    You use and understand a development methodolgy e.g. Agile, TDD.

    You use UML and other industry standards.

    You are too handson to be a pure architect but are closer to an Architect than a coder.

  4. IgorM says:

    – Knows breadth of technologies and can mix and match them arriving to a solution acceptable by customers

    – Capable of building complex multi-tiered systems

    – Has enough knowledge to pick up the right technology for each end every component of a complex system

    – Technology agnostic and knows both xUnix + Windows aspects as well as desktop and server specifics

    – Knows how to build S+S and Cloud-based systems

  5. Harald says:

    beside the points already mentioned – in relation to a standard developer

    – Re-integrates existing components, systems, technologies, products

    – Has deep knowledge about Interfaces, Protocolls, Contracts to this products – on a technical level.

    – Configuration and Reuse over Coding.

    – Design of new components is aware of enterprise requirements like multi-user, multi-client

    – Solutions designed for a longer span of life

  6. pankaj.nikam says:

    Hey Gerry does this mean that the people who are going to give 70-502 or similar exams have to wait for the updated versions ? and do they have to give 70-536 as a prerequisite ?

  7. silverexp says:

    Sorry for not agreeing with the above, but to me "Enterprise Application Developper" has no meaning outside of the one it got from the corresponding MCPD.

    It may be just that the words are badly coined, or that my level in English is too lousy. But as far as I have seen there are the following profiles in a medium development team:

    -junior developer

    -senior developer


    I think the current MCTSs are perfectly targeted at the junior developer, and that the MCPD Windows and Web are perfectly targeted at a senior developer. Now, what is the certification for an architect? It may be Certified Architect, but that training is something else.

    As a recruiter, I’d know today which certs to expect from a junior or senior dev, but I wouldn’t know which certs to expect from an architect. I don’t think MCPD EA is that one.

  8. Enterprise Developer and Enterprise Application Developer both refer to someone who performs software development. It’s not for someone who’s role embodies the overloaded term, "architect."

    I think you guys were on the right track to assume an enterprise developer is someone who can develop Windows, Web and distributed applications. However, I also believe it someone who knows how to interact with TFS for task management, builds, and SCM.

    I also suggest making the titles include more technologies that include WPF, WCF, and WF 4.0. You may also want to include support for developing parallel-processing apps for multi-core systems. That’s my 2 cents.

  9. Pankaj,

    No, it does not mean you have to wait for the next version of exams.  You can take the current 3.5 versions if you want.

    NOTE: 70-536 is still required for .NET 2.0 and .NET 3.5 based exams.  It won’t be required for 4.0 based exams.


  10. Mike Corkery says:

    I would like to add on to Ravi’s comments. In my mind the Enterprise developer is building new applications or features for existing apps that interconnect with a myriad of other applications or services.

    There is a need for significant technical knowledge to determine the correct technologies to use to interact with other systems and to implement those technologies correctly.  

    I agree with Geoff’s comment that this person is much closer to an architect than a coder

  11. TitusT says:

    EAD – able to understand and implement an architecture given by the architect, implementing the right technology and being able to guide/help developers specialized in specific areas like UI, Service, DB, etc.

    can handle (understand, implement)

    all enterprise development technologies in all layers/tiers – WCF, WF, Silverlight, WPF, WinForms, etc.

    Scaling – load balancing, clustering solutions

    Impact of Deployment technologies like install, one-click, etc. on the application development

    Security – role-based, claims, partial-trust, etc

    Integration – legacy integration through P/Invoke, MSMQ, etc.

    Data Access – ADO.NET, SQL/Database Development, LINQ

  12. Mark Price says:

    I have nothing to add to the EAD debate, but I am confused about 70-536. When you first talked about it a few months ago it sounded like it would become an optional MCTS certification or perhaps a requirement for MCPD (a decision I agree with), but now it seems it will be dropped completely. Would you clarify, please?

  13. Hi Mark,

    I don’t recall indicating that 70-536 would become optional.  I think we were discussing it’s future but that decision has been made already.

    70-536 will continue to be a requirement for .NET 2.0 and .NET 3.5 MCTS certifications.

    Moving forward, the areas that are pertinent to each technology, such as WPF, WCF, ASP.NET etc, will be covered on their respective exams. This means that there will be no equivalent to 70-536 for the .NET 4.0 exam series.

    We are also creating four new exams for entry level in software development, Windows applications, Web applications and database foundations that will also help to cover some of the areas that used to be a part of 70-536.


  14. Hi Edward,

    The biggest reason that we don’t do a coding assignment is scalability.

    An actual person has to view the coding assignment.

    We are working on an automated scoring engine now but as you might appreciate, scoring developer exams is not an easy task to do in an automated way.

    Stay tuned for updates.


  15. pankaj.nikam says:

    "We are also creating four new exams for entry level in software development, Windows applications, Web applications and database foundations that will also help to cover some of the areas that used to be a part of 70-536."

    This will be very exciting for beginners… nice decision… 🙂

  16. ploeh says:

    While I don’t know what is the difference between an Enterprise Developer and an Enterprise Application Developer, to me, Enterprise Development is the counterpart to ISV development, i.e. an Enterprise Developer develops software for a specific enterprise’s specific purpose.

    This might be highly scalable, distributed applications usually involving databases, but tend to have a relatively well-known and controlled install base, as opposed to ISV software, that is usually installed in myriad environments beyond the developer’s control and knowledge.

    Besides features, enterprise application developers tend to focus on scalability, performance and, to a lesser degree, security, compared to an ISV developers stronger focus on managability and flexibility.

  17. rfreire says:


    I agree with most of the EAD definitions you all provided. However… I’m not so sure this fits a MS .NET Framework exam.

    I participated in the development of the 70-565 exam and sometimes it was quite difficult to map some of the objectives with .NET Framework technologies. Evaluating or designing a solution for performance or scalability involves a lot of decisions and it is difficult to describe it in a short scenario or even find good answer options…. creating a testing approach may not involve .NET Framework at all.

    I guess the "Enterprise Application Developer" term for the 70-565 exam was a marketing name to wrap many technologies that have a TS exam but not a PRO one: WCF, WPF, WF, ADO.NET… and so on. And I think the focus should be on these technologies… so, put the name you want to the exam, but make sure the content of the exam is PRO WCF+WPF+WF+ADO.NET… etc.

    And I’m not saying security, scalability, performance, testing, methdologies…. should not be tested… it should, but not in a .NET Framework exam… maybe a MASTER or MCA is better for that.

    Sorry Gerry, I didn’t address your question… but maybe this feedback is also helpful.



  18. Hi Rodrigo,

    All of these comments are helpful.

    Thanks to everyone.


  19. rfreire says:

    … a small note on my previous comment.

    I didn’t mean terms and objectives like security, performance, scalability, and so on… should be completely removed from MCPD exams. I think they are mostly welcomed in a MCPD exam.

    What I mean is that all these terms should be scoped inside a specific .NET Framework technology and not treated by themselves, isolated of any context.

  20. I am sad to see that 70-536 is being merged into the MCTS exams. Even if the topics were quite unrelated to each other the exam as a whole made a lot of sense – it proves basic knowledge of the .NET framework, without being tied to a specific technology.

    Merging the exam into the various MCTS exams is a terrible idea because the exam curriculum was rather large and a merged exam will not be able to spend as many questions on the many very relevant topics it contained as a separate exam was able to. This devaluates the new MCTS exams and makes them much less useful as a tool for recruiters.

    Additionally, students must study an even broader set of topics for the MCTS exams which will invariably lead to shallower knowledge of each topic, as most people only spend so much time per exam.

    Last, it’s virtually impossible for CPLS partners to sell a course spanning more than 5 days – and it’s simply impossible to cover both .NET fundamentals and a specific technology in-depth in a single course. Without a separate exam to look forward to at the end of a course, it will be much harder to sell students a set of courses leading to an MCTS exam.

    By all means, clean up the exam and move topics around. But please do keep a prerequisite exam covering basic .NET framework knowledge for the MCTS exams!

  21. Hi Morten,

    Thanks for the comments.

    Let me clarify a little more around the rationale.

    The entire 536 exam will not be "spinkled" throughout the remaining exams.  At this stage, we fully expect that candidates for the MCTS certifications will already have .NET foundational concepts down.  The technology has been in the market for some time now and high schools are teaching C# and VB.NET classes.

    We also are in the process of creating "entry-level" exams for software programming, database, Windows and Web app foundations.  These exams are aimed at those new to programming at the high school and 2 year college levels.  

    So, when you combine the current high school and 2 year college programs with these new exams, the core .NET foundations that 536 tested, will be mostly taken care of.  The remaining aspects will be tested in the MCTS exams by testing concepts for that specific technology with a tilt toward ensuring the candidate also understands the core fundamental concepts as they relate to that technology.

    Hopefully this makes more sense now.


  22. morten@mertner.com says:

    It still makes little sense to me to phase out the only exam covering what should be common BCL knowledge. I still remember how the original .NET 1.1 exams all were sprinkled with database-questions like how to use a DataReader or DataAdapter, or covering basics like signing assemblies (with unfortunate questions on command-line syntax, but that is an aside). It made me feel like there was a distinct lack of focus for the exams, as you’d get similar questions on the next exam.

    It matters little that other exams will be introduced if they are not a prerequisite to attaining the MCTS credential. I would have hoped that the MCTS credential proved basic knowledge of things like serialization, IO, security, events and delegates, reflection, etc. — but without a prerequisite exam I fail to see how this can be the case.

    And although I wish it was otherwise, most developers I encounter in my work as MCT have a rather limited understanding of these basics. With the BCL ever expanding I would instead have expected to see an evolved 536, covering interesting new topics like code contracts and dynamic objects..

    That said, I realise you’re all set on the new exams, but urge you to reconsider when the opportunity arises.

  23. matt says:

    Although 70-536 was a ‘fundamentals’ exam it covered a lot of stuff jnr developers do not have a grasp on. Code access security, app domains, threading etc. A lot of those topics are more difficult than the content of the mcts exams. Removing this core stuff from the cert track may not be ideal and the alternative is to repeat it throughout the other exams which can be frustrating. I have recently completed the 3.5 mcts exams and most had some ado.net questions sprinkled throughout even though there is now a separate exam for this. If anything 70-536 was more difficult than the more narrow mcts exams. One thing I did not like about 70-536 was that it did not count as anything on its own – not even an MCP. I got an ID but it was not clear if it counted for an MCP.

  24. charlesjacobus says:

    I’m interested in upgrading my MCPD (70-458). I see that 70-566 was recently made available but not any study guides that I can find. So I have a question: If I do not upgrade to VS2008, can I upgrade with one exam to VS2010. Or will I have to take more than one exam since I skipped VS2008?


  25. Hi Charles,

    We normally do not allow upgrade paths to skip technologies.  So, there will not be a direct path from 2005 to 2010.


  26. Kengkaj says:

    So for jumping (skip at least one generation of technology), it’s easier to start from scratch, isn’t it?

    Because if for example I want to upgrade from MCPD Windows 2005 to MCPD Windows 2010, I’ve to upgrade 2 times, from 2005 to 2008 and then 2008 to 2010.

  27. Hi Kengkaj,

    My recommendation to candidates is that they look at how many exams are required to acheive the certification they want, both from the perspective of starting from scratch or using the available upgrade paths.


  28. Richard says:

    I just started studying for MCPD – ASP.NET certification and I was wondering if I should take the 70-536 exam. Could I take 70-562 and 564 then take the VS2010 upgrade or will the upgrade only be available to those with MCPD certification (thus requiring the 70-536 exam)?


  29. Hi Richard,

    In order to qualify for the upgrade, you must have the MCPD certification.

    In order to achieve the MCPD certification on .NET 3.5 or 2.0, you must take exam 70-536.  It is a requirement for the MCTS certification and therefore is a requirement for the MCPD as well.


  30. Kengkaj says:

    This may be a bit off-topic.

    But from MS’s website it says "Typically, mainstream support is discontinued 7 to 10 years after the initial product release."


    But mainstream support for .NET frameworks are only about 5 years.

    For .NET framework 4.0, do you have plan to extend period of mainstream support?

  31. Hi Kengkaj,

    Neither myself nor Microsoft Learning control the product support lifecycle for Microsoft Products.

    You will have to ask the product groups that question.  We simply follow their lifecycle support with our exams.


  32. David says:

    Hi Gerry, great blog but I’m confused!

    Ok so I was planning to do 70-536 then 70-562 to get a MCTS in NET Framework 3.5, ASP.NET Applications. From what I’ve read vs2010 and .net4.0 will be out between 2010-2011 so I assume the exams will be out by 2011, probably in less than 2 years. But from what I’ve read the 70-536 and 70-562 exams will only count towards .net 2.0 and 3.5, but for .net 4.0 there will be a whole set of new exams (and only an upgrade path frmo a MCPD which I’m not doing). Does that mean if I do 70-536 and 70-562 now, I will essentially have to do 2 more exams when the .net 4.0 certifications come out to bring me upto .net 4.0 standard?

  33. Hi David, thanks.

    We are changing the landscape a little bit for .NET 4 and moving forward.  Exam 70-536 has been a prerequisite for MCTS on .NET 2.0 and 3.5.  It will be removed for .NET 4.0.

    We are trying to streamline the certification process so that we can have a "one exam, one cert" mantra for the MCTS credentials.

    What this means is that there won’t be upgrade exams for the MCTS because it will only require one exam to get the latest certification.  So, if you pass your MCTS on .NET 3.5 and then later want to get the MCTS Web developer for .NET 4.0, you will only need to take one exam.

    BTW, my plan is to have all of my .NET 4.0 exams out in 2010.


  34. David says:

    Fantastic! Thats a lot clearer, I’ll go for the .net 2.0 exam to get the foundation for the upcoming .net 4.0 exam… and I like the "one exam one cert" model, might be more work and revision but a lot more rewarding! (than doing a pre-requiste exam that counts for nothing on paper) Thanks again

  35. Ed Collins says:

    I’d like to second Morten’s point about the value of 70-536 – I’m over ten years out of university and it was great to reconnect with some rigourous, building blocks stuff, for a platform that had lots of new things ideas like generics to settle in to. Whilst it’s great to understand specific technolgies like ASP.net, it’s better, and perhaps easier to build specifc knowledge on top of a sound basic knowledge – understanding partial classes from 70-536 made understanding the details of the ASP.net page model a lot easier.

    I can understand from a marketing point of view a prerequisite might be an extra boundary to entry, and you might get fewer people jumping on to the certification route; but those who do get on would be better equiped to do their job. I’ll be bold and suggest you might even find the certifications getting a better reputation.

    Kind Regards,

  36. These are all great comments and support for 70-536 and I am impressed that everyone feels this strongly about the exam.  Unfortunately, we get equal amounts of push in the other direction.  It’s always a balancing act.  

    Exams will always have prerequisites and the technology exams for managed code will now require core .NET fundamentals as knowledge prior to undertaking the exams.

    Realistically, when you look at 70-536, it did not cover every important aspect of the framework.  One exam can’t possibly do that.  So, how do determine the right amount of coverage?  Why do we have content on sending email in that exam?  Is that core to .NET?  Not really, in my opinion.

    This decision is not a marketing one designed to sell more exams.  It’s a decision designed to simplify the .NET certification story that some already say is complicated.  By leaving the 536 exam in the picture, it requires updating periodically that also leaves us open to issues around qualifications and versioning.  


  37. Jon says:

    I have to chime in here and say I’m a little dissappointed with the decision to retire exam 70-536.  I have now taken four of the five exams for the .Net 2.0 EAD, and found the 70-536 to be the most valuable and challenging exam so far.  That said,  I’m excited to see  what’s in store for the future, but I’m a little worried about the whole one exam -> earn credential model…

  38. Chris Hance says:

    I’m working with the Lakeland .NET User Group (www.lakelandug.net) to provide some programming fundamentals / intro OOP training. Between the career-changers and the college students at our host campus, quite a few people could use more time on the basics.

    If Microsoft is planning to test on something similar, it would help our marketing to advertise that fact. A tangible outcome, without having to learn the entire BCL first, certainly encourages attendance. Even if there is a few months’ delay before the exam is released. Any anticipated dates? And will it be at all similar to the RampUp "Developer Basics" series?

  39. Hi Chris,

    While I can’t give you specific dates or delivery platforms, I can tell you that we have created hour new exams around programming fundamentals including OOP, database fundamentals, Web application fundamentals and Windows application fundamentals.

    These are intended to act as a stepping stone to the MCTS exams.

    Again, no concrete dates yet but I will announce those here when they do launch.  I suspect summer or early fall at the latest.


  40. Justin Austin says:

    Will 70-536 be required for an MCPD certification for .NET 4.0?

    Does this mean that the .NET 4.0 Windows and Web MCPD certs will just require a single prerequisite plus 70-563?

  41. Hi Justin,

    No, the 536 requirement does not carry forward for .NET 4.  It is still required for the .NET 2.0 and 3.5 tracks.

    I’m not sure what you mean by the last sentence.

    For Windows developers on .NET 4, you will require an MCTS and an MCPD exam.  Numbers to be determined.


  42. Mike says:

    Question: What does the term Enterprise Application Developer or Enterprise Developer mean to you?

    An accumulation of Microsoft technologies is one aspect. Some level of experience in each relevant subject area, with an ability to distinguish and abstract technologies for solutions and business.

    Another major aspect is adapting to change. Maybe one piece, e.g. "subject area", is missing or different. Recognizing a missing MS technology or creating a workaround with a different technology, e.g. open source or alternate vendor technology (non MS), is a requirement for an enterprise developer.

    Lastly, understanding the benefits and weaknesses, simplicity or complexity, and risks of maintaining legacy verses implementing new technology is required by an enterprise developer.

    That is about the shortest summary I can manage on Friday afternoon. 🙂

  43. Larry Browning says:

    It means being a mad squirrel trying to put his nuts away. Everytime he gets home he finds that he got the outdated nut and must go get new ones- pweey keep your certifications I’ll learn a version then move on this technocrap on the bleeding edge of technology is for morticians and bill gates who has a bazillion dollars to spend on training. And then to specialize Enterprise you say oh good lord. You’all will have to srart training us if you want this kind of specialization. It’s hard enough to stay with the current version what is it now VS 2020

  44. JM says:

    I think that retiring 70-536 is really a bad decisión. This is by far the most significative exam that allows to demonstrate a good level in .net and the one that males a difference when solving difficult programming problems. I totally agree with Morten and others in their viese about it.

    In my oppinion retiring it will lower the value of the certifications. You should enhance it, not retire it.



  45. NH-Student says:

    I a´m quite new to this topic, but trying to do my best to learn this subject and certify. The task is rather confussing and frustrating.

    I have passed the 70-536 & 70-528 and wish to continue to EAD, but it’s not clear which and what certifications should be the next steps.

    The confussion is with the certification nr’s.

    70-549 (If I take this, am I certifyed to the latest standard of EAD MCPD?… or is this no-longer adequate and I need the 70-505/70-561/70-503 – 70-565? (Which has no learning material available and if needed, how the hell should new students understand this!)

    Every business needs new starters and a standard of Quality assurance should be given before products are put on the market!!

    Cheers from a very dis-illusioned and frustrated student.

    Every business needs new talent  

  46. Dear NH Student,

    I’m replying to another post under the name of Scott as they seem to be from the same person.

    If not, then please let me know and I will answer your questions here.


  47. Andy Wyatt says:

    The 70-536 exam was quite hard and I’m currently halfway through studying 70-562.

    I feel as though 70-536 was a waste of time now and that you’ve undervalued it.  I’m very sure that many others will feel the same after putting so much effort into a course that others in the future will not need to do.

    You just down valued MCTS + MCPD 3.5 by saying 50%-33% of it respectively was either a mistake (possibly funding reasons) or not needed.

    I take it now since you’re dropping an exam you’ll have the budget to make MCPD training kits?

    Many developers are week in the areas it covers.

    Boooo!  My two cents.

  48. Thanks for you booo Andy.


  49. Andy Wyatt says:

    Illegitimi non carborundum 🙂

    Garry I really do like the exams / training kits your guys are releasing and I look forward to the v4 exams with great anticipation.

    Q) What does the term Enterprise Application Developer or Enterprise Developer mean to you?

    A) EAD for me sounds a bit more of a software guy where as ED sounds a bit networky.

  50. Leo says:

    Why not have a separate .NET fundamentals exam, similar to the 70-536, but that is NOT a pre-requisite to the other MCTS exams and DOES give a separate certification? This way we could have the best of both worlds:

    1. We would still be following the simpler "one exam, one certification" mantra, since this exam would NOT be a pre-requisite to the other MCST exams.

    2. We would also still have a separate .NET fundamentals exam that would give its own certification and would be available for anyone interested in core .NET concepts. This certification  could be used to prove that a candidate has understanding of core .NET fundamentals.



  51. All good thoughts Leo,

    Thanks for the input and feedback.

    I can tell you that it won’t happen for the immediate future, but perhaps next year.


  52. asp.net mvc says:

    I am pleased to hear about the 1-exam : 1-cert decision. Even as a consultant developer, where certifications are important for marketability, the 70-536’s inability to produce a credential was always a barrier to me even beginning to take the WPF, WCF, ASP.NET exams. I know these technologies to the point where I would just take the exam to get the credential, despite the doubt I hear of about the value in Microsoft certs these days. But these exams require one exam, and then another exam, and money, to get a single credential. So my decision is to wait until the cost of a cert meets my expectations, and it finally looks so.

  53. Wally says:

    Well, I just started few days ago learning 70-536 for gaining MCPD.

    Do you think I should wait for new 4.0 paths ?

    Could you estimate when are 4.0 becomming available (yearquarter) ?

    Thanks in advance.

  54. Peter Moss says:


    I have to agree with others about 70-536.

    This exam does cover basics of framework in

    detail that no other exam does.

    Removing it from MCTS was probably just a marketing

    decision to get more people interested in

    getting "Microsoft Certifications with .Net on it".

    You’ll end up with ".Net certified" programmers

    who will have little or no knowledge of .Net

    framework or programming concepts in general.

    MCPD should be much harder to be relevant.

    Why don’t you create 2 or 3 different levels

    of MCPD certifications, say "junior", "intermediate"

    and "senior" levels.  

    This way your certifications would be easier to understand by hiring managers and recruiters.  

    You know, "senior certificate holders" can be matched

    to senior positions, etc.

    Your "senior" level certifications should be hard to

    get by CS or Engineering graduates with 5-10 years of development experience.  That would really

    make your certificates valuable.


  55. binoj7 says:

    Exam 70-536 is back for 4.0 on public demand.

    We are all hoping that Gerry’s next post would have this subject!

  56. Binoj,

    Sorry to disappoint but no, it is not.


  57. rtpHarry says:

    Ok I just read all of the comments in this thread. Lots of interesting views. I am really surprised to see so much support for 70-536.

    I have been coding asp.net websites for three years now and always put off the exams because of that exam. I use best practices and read architecture books and try my best to be a proper developer.

    In this time I have never had a real need to use most of what I read in the 70-536 exam training book. It always felt like reading an instruction manual for a car that I didnt own.

    I am happy that I will get to focus on an exam that revolves around my day to day job as a web developer.

    Gerry, could you clarify:

    – Will the .net 4 exams be longer to cover all the technology or are you looking at the same amount of questions on more varied topics?

    – Also are you saying that the "high school" exams are going to be brought out as a level below MSTS?

  58. Harry,

    The .NET 4 exams will not be longer than existing ones.  The questions will incorporate implicit testing on core .NET as well as the topic of the question.

    I am not saying that any "high school" exam will be brought out as any exam.  I cannot comment at this time on anything else pertaining to exams outside of MCTS or MCPD but merely let you know that there are some new ones coming.


  59. Jarrod says:

    Hi Gerry,

    You said in this thread that you plan to have the MCPD for .NET 4 exams ready this year. Does this apply only to the US or will the exams be available elsewhere aswell. Specifically, South Africa?

  60. Hi Jarrod,

    That will be worldwide availability in English.  Other languages will be later in the year.


  61. Moses Rajan says:

    All the comments are really interesting and informative. I am very curious to work in VS 2010. Right now i am working in VS 2008, and its just awesome. I have taken up exam 536 and 528 (web based) successfully, and got my certification too, in June 2008. Now i would like to do certifications in Dot net 4.0. Where can i learn? When can i take up the exam?

Skip to main content