All I can say is watch out for this company. They are a total bait and switch. They don't prepare you for what you need to know for the role and leave you high and dry. From my interview, I could tell that not even the people who work there understand their technology, yet they're the ones who are supposed to judge whether or not to hire us. It's sad. Let me start from the beginning. Over the course of my three months of their interview process--yes, three months!--based upon my initial phone interview, I had the impression that all I needed to know was basic hardware troubleshooting, such as replacing printers, and Microsoft Excel. Not once over the process was I ever told anything differently. I'm getting ahead of myself, though. After I passed the initial phone screen, I had to give three references and do an online test. It's been a while, so I forget what the test was like, but I know I passed it. Finally, after three months of anxiety, I finally was scheduled for a face-to-face interview. I went down to Columbia, MO, and my first shock was that it wasn't a one-on-one interview. It was an interview with five people: three in person and two remotely! I wish I would have known that, so I could have been better prepared, but it is what it is. My next shock was discovering that I was supposed to know all about Microsoft technology, specifically Active Directory. I know Microsoft products fairly well, but I know very little about Active Directory, unfortunately. If I would have known I needed to know it for the interview, I definitely would have studied up on it over my three months preceding the interview, but god forbid anyone let me know. It's like it was all a secret. The funny thing is the main person who interviewed me seemed to know little about Active Directory, as well. He asked me what I knew about Active Directory and I said that Kerberos was part of it, but he said "No"! He didn't explain his reasoning. He just bluntly stated "No." This was a shock to me, since I knew that Kerberos is part of Active Directory, since it's used for authentication purposes within it, yet he acted like I was wrong, which showed how ignorant he is about Active Directory himself. He at least could have stated why he thought I was wrong. What's even more odd is that no one else corrected him, despite that there were two other people in person there, along with two other people who were attending remotely. Anyway, for the rest of the interview, I felt I did decently well to get the job, despite the fact that the head interviewer claimed I was "wrong" about Kerberos, but within the next few days, I received a rejection email and, of course, was very upset, since that's three months of my life I'll never get back. The whole interview process was a joke. From the beginning where I was told the wrong information for what I needed to know for the role all the way to the end where my own interviewers weren't fully knowledgeable themselves, I felt like I was treated like a fool. Plus, no interview process for an entry-level role should take three months. I had many interviews and none took longer than two or three weeks. Three months is ludicrous. Anyway, now that I've potentially burned my bridge with this company, I guess I'll shut up now. I'm glad I finally got this off my chest, though, considering I'm still extremely upset to this day.