Thanks, all, for these helpful and insightful comments. Here are some responses to the issues people raised.
First: yes, it is correct that VCDX3 was available for a long time after vSphere 4.0 shipped: more than 18 months, as a matter of fact. What we learned from that experience: that was too long. Well before the end of that interval, it was extremely common for VCDX3 designs to contain vSphere 4 components. So we won't have an overlap that long again.
It is noteworthy that, in spite of this long overlap, people were upset when the end of VCDX3 was announced. People were particularly angry in Europe, because the last VCDX3 defense opportunity was held in the Americas. There were accusations of favoritism towards North Americans. As I've explained elsewhere, we try to rotate the last opportunity to attempt VCDX-N among the geographies: the Americas, Europe-Middle East-Africa, and Asia-Pacific.
You could certainly still argue, however, that 6 months is too short even if 18 months is too long. That's a perfectly reasonable stance to take. So what's the right answer?
One policy we've considered: after vSphere N+1 is announced, hold one more VCDX-N defense in each geography. But even that apparently reasonable policy has flaws. For example: Brazil is a huge market for VMware products, and growth there is very strong. What if the extra defense opportunity for the Americas was in São Paulo? Many disappointed people I've heard from recently, I suspect, would continue to be disappointed.
Before anybody asks: treating the United States or North America as special for any reason is a non-starter. VMware aims to be a global company, and VCDX aims to be a global program. Neither aspiration is fully met, but that's our constant goal.
Another possible policy: we could publish a list of defense opportunities for at least 9-12 months into the future at all times. This policy is also imperfect: we would not be able to warrant that all of these would be VCDX-N opportunities, because the company does not give advance notice of when vSphere N+1 is to be announced.
Anyway, I am not writing this note just to swat away objections. Quite the contrary. There are certainly some problems with our existing systems that affect VCDX candidates negatively, and their negative impact is greatest at the time of switchovers from VCDX-N to N+1.
1. It is difficult to get exam slots for the VCAP exams, especially outside North America.
2. At switchover times, people need visibility into certifications' upgrade paths, so that they can make a sound decision about whether to get the current version and then upgrade or else attempt the new one. But we usually can't announce the upgrade path at the same time as our announcement that defenses for the current version are coming to an end.
Anyway, I am sure there's a way we can provide better guidance for VCDX candidates, and I am going to find it, with your help. In the meantime, what about the current situation?
I think people are being too quick to rule out Singapore and Frankfurt. Someone suggested that it would cost Cdn$3000 to fly to Frankfurt. A Kayak.com search for me just turned up fares from Toronto of US$1000 or so. Admittedly, I chose my dates to include a Saturday-night stay. If anybody is considering a VCDX defense in which you fly intercontinentally to the site and then defend without first adjusting to the time change: for the love of all that is holy, please don't do that.
Kayak.com also finds fares from Toronto to Singapore in time for our defenses for US$1400 or so.
Incidentally, we try to accommodate people traveling far for defenses with appointments at the beginning or end of the defense week, to help them with travel issues.
Beyond that: will there be VCDX4 opportunities beyond Frankfurt? Don't assume it. But it will be fruitful for me to hear from people who would definitely attempt VCDX4 if there were... and where. PM me or send us email at vcdx at vmware dot com .
To sum this up: we are inevitably going to disappoint people when we announce the end of a VCDX-N era. We do want to minimize the number of people we disappoint and to ensure that they're not disproportionately resident in one region of the globe.
