8/14    Stanford, MIT, and pretty much all the other UCs have a 1 year MS
        program upon satisfactory completion of your EECS degree (and they
        don't even have to take the GRE). How come Berkeley has no such
        program?   -junior/senior now regretting coming to Berkeley
        \_ Because UCB doesn't give a shit about you at all and only 'teaches'
           undergraduate courses because they're required to by the state?
           \_ an MS program wouldn't involve undergraduate courses, twink. -tom
              \_ Tom, do you have a masters degree from UCB, Stanford, or MIT?
                 Do you have a masters degree at all?
              \_ Child, with your *B*A or *B*S you're _not_ a grad student and
                 they're not doing you any favors.  UCB would do *only* PhD
                 research if they were allowed.  MS would get fucked, too.
        \_ What? NOW you notice?
        \_ UCB sucks.  plain and simple.
                \_ you weren't forced to attend it asshole.
        \_ Because Cal doesn't bother running vending machine MS programs to
           make money.
                \_ all the other schools, 1st tier or 2nd tier do it. Why not
                   Cal? Are they not doing it for the principle? Bull shit.
                   I'm a Cal student and I want my fuckin' easy MS degree
                   just like all the others.
                   \_ schools like these have thus devalued the MS degree,
                      just like the slew of 2nd rate business schools like
                      pepperdine pumping out thousands of MBAs a year have
                      devalued all but the 5 top MBA schools. -bhc
                      \_ Which are the top 5?  Is Haas one of them?
                        \_ Haas isn't top 5 or even top 10. If all the other
                           schools devalue the BS/MS degree, then it is even
                           more important for Cal BS graduates to get an easy
                           MS degree. Cal SUCKS.
                           \_ you're a moron.
                              http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/mba/brief/mbarank_brief.php
                                \_ as i told the guy above, why'd you
                                   come then? were you not "smart"
                                   enough to get into 'furd or mit?
                                   \_ whether or not he's smart doesn't make
                                      Cal a better school.  If you were smart
                                      enough to get into MIT or Stanford you
                                      might know that instead of waving your
                                      GO BEAR! flag around blindly.
                                        \_ no. if cal is the best place
                                           you could get into, then you
                                           should be damn happy they
                                           even accepted you, lest you
                                           wanted to go to an even worse
                                           school.
                                           \_ I couldn't afford private school.
                                            _/
              untrue. You can keep telling it to yourself, though, if it makes
              you fell better.
                The point is that even the lesser schools have a MS program
        \_ besides, it's generally accepted in the outside world that a
           Cal BS is the equivalent of a 'furd MS. everybody knows it's
           easy to get a second rate, add-On MS from those schools.
           \_ I can't speak for CS, but in civil engineering, this is simply
              untrue. You'll do fine with a Cal degree, FWIW, but the Stanford
              kids take a fast track to the best stuff available. I never meet
              any because they tend to be two or more strata above where I
              and the rest of my state school fellows work. I'm not complaining
              about it. It was what I found when I got out to the real world.
           \_ Really?  You mean there's no point for a Cal CS grad to get the
              'furd MS degree?
           \_ that's what your Cal advisor would tell you.  They'd be wrong but
              thats what they'd tell you...
           \_ WRONG. A degree DOES mean something. It means a lot to stupid
              recruiters. It means a lot to the real world. It means a lot
              in the Silicon Valley-- "everyone has at least a MS in
              Silicon Valley"
           \_ As someone who actually has a bullshit vending machine MS degree
              in CS from 'furd, it totally does make a significant difference
              in the job market. Getting my MS at 'furd was the easiest year
              of school I ever had. Spent most of my time hanging out at Fry's
              and surfing pr0n. But it never fails to impress ppl when I tell
              them I went to Cal AND Stanfurd. I've gotten big bonuses and
              raises, have never been laid off. Made six-figs salary my 3rd
              year out of school. One time a recruiter rewrote my resume so
              that my education was at the very top. One of the best
              investments I ever made.
              \_ I was admitted to the full-time MSCS at 'furd nine years ago,
                 but I couldn't afford the tuition so I went to get a job
                 instead.  Now I'm thinking about the HCP part-time MS.  Do you
                 think having been admitted will give me an advantage when I
                 apply now?
           \_ a degree isn't important when the market is good. But when it
                sours and everyone who is competing for your job also has a
                Furd/MIT/Cal BS degree, who is going to get more notice from
                head hunters? A Cal BS guy with 10 years of experience or a
                Furd BS/MS guy with 10 years of experience? If I were a
                clueless headhunter, the answer would be obvious to me, and
                if I were a clued headhunter, I wouldn't be one in the first
                place.