Here we go - good old British compromise.
I believe that both Steve and Andy are right. Why? Well, when it comes to the crunch, if it's you vs someone without the exam, you'll probably get the job, especially if you're a contractor and HR don't have a say. But it's true the point that you both make that these exams are NOT measuring real world skills. I've been a Sql Server DBA for 5 years now, yet the sample exam questions do not bare any relationship to what I do on a day-to-day basis. Now that's scarey, I may as well just take a Comp. Sci degree (which I've got) and mistakenly think that I can slip straight into a senior developer's job straight out of college (Wrong!) Microsoft, you guys have got to wake up, because good people out here on planet commercial development world are put off by your exams because they're not seated in the real what-employers-want world of hard-headed commercial IT. All you seem to be testing is the most esoteric areas of your products, which is of little use to anyone, especially employers, and has ZERO incentive for those of us who do the real world work. Like winning the competition for the mot obfuscated C, you're not gonna get a job, or any respect for what you know, off the back of it. Only once this fundamental flaw in the exam process, plus Steve's assertion that you should be examined on 1000+ questions is addresses will employers start to take the exams seriously again.