Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google, Microsoft In Epic Hiring War

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the it's-raining-resumes dept.

Google 235

natecochrane writes "Looking for a new job? Then Google and Microsoft have 6200 roles globally this quarter up for grabs, the first salvos in a costly war for talent. Google alone will hire 6200 engineers, executives and sales staff this year — its biggest intake ever. This story details where the biggest bucks and most fun jobs are to be had and how you can apply for them. There's even a job for an Xbox PR person — fancy being paid to play with toys all day?"

cancel ×

235 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Microsoft weenies (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35891904)

Microsoft prefer weenies. Just cruise their forums, they are all "of a type". Not sure about what Google are looking for.

Re:Microsoft weenies (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893374)

Not sure about what Google are looking for.

No one over the age of 21 need apply from what I've heard.

Positions in Sydney (3, Funny)

belthize (990217) | more than 3 years ago | (#35891956)

Drat, I might have applied for one of those network security positions but sadly
a) I don't live in Australia
b) I have no pen testing experience.

I've always just used them on an as needed basis. I guess I could flub my way through an interview extolling the benefits of ball point vs felt tip and maybe make up some interesting war story of the good old days and ink wells. Ultimately I doubt I could penetrate the Australian job market.

numbers?? (1)

shortscruffydave (638529) | more than 3 years ago | (#35891962)

"Google and Microsoft have 6200 roles" and "Google alone will hire 6200 engineers, executives and sales staff". So, are Microsoft hiring or not?

Re:numbers?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892026)

Then Google and Microsoft have 6200 roles globally this quarter up for grabs

Google alone will hire 6200 engineers, executives and sales staff this year

Read much?

Re:numbers?? (2)

shortscruffydave (638529) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892096)

Yes I read...do you?

So MS and G have 6200 roles this quarter.

If Google are hiring 6200 this year, then it infers that Google will hire 6200 in the first quarter, and then none in the next 3 quarters (giving the 6200 this year).

And from those numbers it still leaves Microsoft with zero over either time period.

Re:numbers?? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892144)

First, it implies, you infer. Second, it doesn't imply that at all, and if you infer that then you're a fucking idiot.

Re:numbers?? (1)

shortscruffydave (638529) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892190)

My apologies - you are correct that I did make the mistake of saying "infer", when of course I should have used "imply". Now, would you please be so kind as to explain why I am, as you so eloquently put it, a f***ing idiot?

Re:numbers?? (3, Funny)

kmdrtako (1971832) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892258)

Well, let me spell it out for you–

Google + Microsoft = 6200 this quarter.

Google = 6200 this year ~== 1550 per quarter.

Which might suggest that Microsoft will hire the other 4550 this quarter.

Does that help?

(No, I'm not the AC that called you a f*cking idiot.)

Re:numbers?? (4, Informative)

shortscruffydave (638529) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892454)

I acknowledge that I failed to interpret the numbers correctly, and thank those who provided clarification. In particular, I thank those who did so without use of insult or obscenity.

Re:numbers?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892556)

Google + Microsoft = 6200 for 1 quarter
Google = 6200 for 1 year
Google = 6199 for 1st quarter and 1 for the second, and ZERO AND ZERO for the last 2 quarters
Microsoft = 1 for the first quarter....
Man, what is your math score again?
And just for the sake the argument, lets not forget that this is also true:
Google hire 10000 for the first quarter, and will hire -3800 for the second quarter.....
Did i mention the virtual jobs too? Or lets use the proper term, imaginary (complex) jobs......
Do you still follow me?

Re:numbers?? (1)

kmdrtako (1971832) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892826)

Google + Microsoft = 6200 for 1 quarter
Google = 6200 for 1 year
Google = 6199 for 1st quarter and 1 for the second, and ZERO AND ZERO for the last 2 quarters
Microsoft = 1 for the first quarter....

Yeah, that could happen too. I don't believe that's likely.

Man, what is your math score again?

Higher than your social skills score. I can pretty much guarantee.

And just for the sake the argument, lets not forget that this is also true:
Google hire 10000 for the first quarter, and will hire -3800 for the second quarter.....

Can you spell "wrongful termination"? If anyone is hiring and firing like that you can bet there will be lawsuits. In most of Europe that kind of hiring and firing will bring the government down on you right quick too.

Did i mention the virtual jobs too? Or lets use the proper term, imaginary (complex) jobs......
Do you still follow me?

I know you're apparently impressed with how intelligent you seem to think you are. Is that what you're asking?

Re:numbers?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893248)

Let me ask you again, what is the sum of 10000 + (-3800)?
In my math dictionary it is called MATH.
If you are not capable of understanding such a simple equation, i really don't see any sense of arguing with you.
btw, what about: (10000 + j * 2000) + (-3800 + j*2000)?
and what about: your IQ score is exactly j * 1000......yes, you guessed it right, it is imaginary.

Re:numbers?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893842)

You really are a bit of a penis, aren't you?

Re:numbers?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892332)

Google and MS could each be hiring 3100 this quarter (6200 when added up). Then Google hires another 3100 next quarter (still this year) to reach a total of 6200 this year.

Re:numbers?? (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892210)

So MS and G have 6200 roles this quarter.

It doesn't say MS and G have 6,200 roles each. It could have been clearer, but I read it as MS and G have 6,200 roles between them.

Re:numbers?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892266)

Perhaps as we're talking about numbers, the power of mathematics might provide some illumination. We know that:

x + y = 6200 (x: hires by Google this quarter, y: hires by MS this quarter)
z = 6200 (z: hires by Google this year)
z >= x (annual hires by Google is at least quarterly hires by Google).

So it happens that:
x + y = z

From which we can infer that y = 0 only if z=x. However, we don't know this, we only know that z>=x, which implies only that y>=0, so MS may or may not be hiring someone, but the numbers do not imply y=0. And they don't "infer" anything.

Re:numbers?? (1)

killmenow (184444) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892338)

Between Google and Microsoft there are X jobs open this quarter. Let Y = Microsoft jobs and Z = Google jobs.

Google will hire a full G employees this year.

1) X = Y + Z
2) G >= Z
3) X = 6200
4) A = 6200

There's nothing in what was written suggesting the actual value of Y or Z. Because G = X you read it to also imply Z = X but that's just one possibility. Z could be 1 and Y could be 6199. G is still 6200.

Disclaimer: I am bad at math

Re:numbers?? (1)

shortscruffydave (638529) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892488)

Disclaimer: I am bad at math

So, it would appear, am I

Re:numbers?? (1)

doug (926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892618)

Yeah. MS will have to be backfilling those 6200 positions.

Re:numbers?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893870)

- Google is hiring 6200 this year

- Microsoft + Google are hiring 6200 this quarter

I see no contradiction

PR person deals with irate consumers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35891980)

There's even a job for an Xbox PR person — fancy being paid to play with toys all day

No. The PR person will be dealing with irate consumers who have had their $50 game disk scratched. [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org] It's still happening ....

Re:PR person deals with irate consumers. (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892808)

I'm perfect for the job. I've already got an idea for re-branding the Xbox "Red Ring of Death" to the "Xbox upgrade opportunity alert"

And what happens is this (3, Insightful)

JamesP (688957) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892050)

Google only hires people who lucks out on their broken hiring process (yes, it's not easy for them to come up with an alternative system). Also, internal politics and B.S. starts to take its toll.

Microsoft hires talented people, but it's then hampered by internal bureaucracy

End result, Google tries to go 'social' and fails again. MS releases their 'meh' Zune tablet that plays for sure until next year.

Re:And what happens is this (5, Interesting)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892192)

horribly broken hiring process, no kidding!

they admit they have a lot of good people NOT get past the interview. its the worst interview process I've been thru (having been at DEC, cisco, juniper, SGI and many other famous places; I was not able to pass their 'test' the last few times I tried). my resume is almost a carbon copy of the job I interviewed for, too. and I live about 5mi from the place.

I gave up. after trying a few times and doing in-person interviews, they just made it impossible to pass this test unless you are a recent grad (most questions were school questions and NOT industry questions).

if you are young and fresh out of school, it may work for you. if you have many industry years under your belt, you will probably not work out there. also, if they feel you are not able to drink their koolaid, they won't want you.

shame, though. I can't see why they think they are so special to the worldl; but they are FULL of attitude.

Re:And what happens is this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892306)

also, if they feel you are not able to drink their koolaid, they won't want you.

shame, though. I can't see why they think they are so special to the worldl; but they are FULL of attitude.

It just hit me. Google has become the hypothetical love child of Microsoft and Apple. Until now something seemed off with just thinking of them as the Open Source M$, but this completes the mental puzzle for me.

Re:And what happens is this (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892370)

I passed the interview for an engineering position on my first try back in november. I'm not a recent grad at all, I've run my own company for the last 8 years and I had around 4 years of previous working experience. So it had been ~10 years since my last job interview, and these were nothing like Google's. Also, this time I applied only to Google. So most of your assumptions are just wrong.

Also, I didn't see any attitude from the interviewers. All of them were very nice, the whole interview process felt like an interesting conversation between colleagues, not like an interrogation room.

On the other hand, you've failed "the last few times" you tried. Maybe it's just sour grapes?

(posting AC because I don't intend to brag)

Re:And what happens is this (1)

JamesP (688957) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892566)

The problem is not the attitude of interviewers, they're usually ok, but the attitude of the company.

Also, their interview process try to cover a vast area, to make an analogy: you pick 10 numbers on a lotto ticket with 20 numbers, and they also pick 10 numbers. And then because you matched '8/10' numbers they think you're not good enough.

So they end up evaluating you on a couple of irrelevant items, and disregarding factors that could have played an important role.

I'm not saying you weren't capable, but you certainly were lucky.

Having said that, I'd take the google interview over most of the interviews around.

Re:And what happens is this (4, Insightful)

Bozdune (68800) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892738)

Hiring is hard, trust me, I've done it for years. However, I claim that silly little tests and so on are just that: silly. I have turned down senior management positions at companies that think they have some sort of Golden Test that candidates need to pass.

There are really only two things to evaluate: (1) Is the candidate smart? and (2) Can the candidate be effective in the position? The first is easy; anyone can tell within the first few minutes of talking to a person whether that person has the minimum IQ necessary to be successful. The second is tougher, and requires a holistic view of communication skills, motivation, and interest level. Skills are secondary; any competent programmer can learn something new, and my personal experience has been that experienced people who are given the chance to learn something new out-perform people who have been doing the same thing for years.

Re:And what happens is this (5, Informative)

swillden (191260) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893866)

Hiring is hard, trust me, I've done it for years. However, I claim that silly little tests and so on are just that: silly. I have turned down senior management positions at companies that think they have some sort of Golden Test that candidates need to pass.

Google doesn't have a "Golden Test". I'll describe Google's process below.

There are really only two things to evaluate: (1) Is the candidate smart? and (2) Can the candidate be effective in the position?

Yes, those are the things you need to figure out, but no, neither of them is very easy to evaluate. Especially not when you set your standards as high as Google does. Your approach to evaluating intelligence is especially flawed -- there are lots of people who can talk the talk, but can't perform when given problems to solve.

Here's Google's interview process (the engineering interview process; I don't know about sales, etc.):

The first step is optional, and depends on various things. It's a phone screen. Usually about one hour long, it involves a series of computer science/algorithms questions, and sometimes includes some coding as well, using a shared editor over the web. This screen has nothing to do with the hire/no-hire decision, it's just a filter to verify that it's not a waste of time to bring the candidate on-site.

The on-site interview takes five hours, each hour an interview by another engineer. One of the five "interviews" is lunch, and it has no effect on the hire/no-hire decision; it's mostly an opportunity for the candidates to ask questions and to talk about Google culture.

Each of the actual interviewers gets to ask whatever questions they like (though with some guidance from HR about what kinds of questions need to be avoided). However, there are some recommendations: Questions should be focused on technical topics that evaluate candidates' problem-solving and coding skills, and at least one coding problem must be included. Google interviewers pay no attention to what you have done in the past, except maybe to break the ice and perhaps as a source of technical topics to discuss. Mostly, they ask serious CS questions, requiring you to design (and implement) algorithms to solve problems, and to evaluate the real and asymptotic efficiency of your solutions, and to discuss issues related to scaling your solutions to Google scale (meaning really, really huge).

Afterwards, each interviewer writes up their thoughts, complete with the code you wrote. They do comment a bit on cultural fit, but unless you're really just impossible to work with (e.g. extremely arrogant) that's unlikely to be a problem. Mostly they discuss your problem-solving approach and ability and your coding ability. Each interviewer also rates you on a scale from 0 to 4, and gives their hire/no-hire recommendation. Google's process minimizes and discourages communication between the interviewers, because they don't want one interviewer with an excessively negative or positive opinion to affect the other interviewers' opinions.

After all reviewers have submitted their feedback, the data is compiled and delivered to a hiring committee (again a group of engineers, perhaps with a manager or two, but mostly engineers -- and Google managers are all engineers, too). Based on that information they have to come to a consensus decision to hire, reject or request more interviews (the latter is rare). Candidates who are rejected are not allowed to interview again for six months.

In rare cases, the decision of this hiring committee may be overridden by another, higher-level committee.

At all levels, the direction given to interviewers and committee members is to lean towards rejection. False negatives are perceived as less painful to the company than false positives, so the process is negatively biased.

Is the system perfect? Clearly not, and Google recognizes that and is constantly looking for ways to improve it. I'm not sure how much I can say about that, other than to say that Google is a data-driven company and that data focus is applied to the hiring process as well. That said, it's by far the best approach I've seen in 20+ years in the industry, and my experience as a Google employee is that there are very, very few bad hires. It's an unusual experience to work at a place where everyone is really bright, and really capable. I'll eschew false modesty and say that I've always been one of the smartest people around every place I've worked... until Google, where I feel like I have to stretch to keep up.

My perspective, BTW, is as someone who recently went through the hiring process (in January) and accepted an offer and started work (in February).

Re:And what happens is this (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892766)

Gambling is evil, I prefer safe bets.

Re:And what happens is this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892600)

The real problem with their hiring process is that it's far too long.
It's fine if you absolutly want to work for them and just apply there. However, if you don't care that much and apply in multiple compagnies, you will probably have definitive propositions from elsewhere before even finishing the interview process at Google.
Futhermore, they don't pay that much and the cool work condition and start-up spirit they once had is slowly fading away as they keep growing.
So, yes, I think we can say that their hiring process is broken.

Re:And what happens is this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892572)

It's probably because you are stupid and cant solve rudimentary algorithmic problems. In other words, you suck.

Re:And what happens is this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892654)

Question is: Why do you think you need their approval of your value?

P.S.: This is a rhetorical question.

Re:And what happens is this (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893278)

I just interviewed with Google last week and am due for my second round at 2pm today. Things look fine on my end....

FWIW, I graduated in 1998. Questions were around writing practical stuff (utility methods or basic frameworks)

also known as 'age discrimination' laundering (2)

decora (1710862) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893364)

they can ask a bunch of questions about the latest fad in academia, which is doubly easy now because universities all put their senior class syllabuses online.

then they only take people who pass.

is this age discrimination? oh but of course not, inspector! we are only taking people who know their stuff!

result: much less costs for google, in health insurance, in wages, in ability to tell people what to do (old folks tend to know their rights more), etc etc etc.

Re:also known as 'age discrimination' laundering (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893782)

So maybe people who did not just graduate should continue to educate themselves. Sounds like sour grapes to me.

Re:And what happens is this (1)

pongo000 (97357) | more than 3 years ago | (#35894070)

Google only hires people who lucks out on their broken hiring process

Tell me about it. I somehow eked my way through a phone interview with them, even after the interviewer asked me a very obscure question about a very obscure RFC (no doubt a weed-out question). After they offered to fly me in for a follow-up interview, I thought about whether this really was a company I wanted to work for, and decided no, it was not.

Their loss, not mine. Never once regretted my decision.

Re:And what happens is this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893292)

Google has been calling and emailing me, and I have been avoiding them because of the broken hiring system.

I work for a giant company doing some interesting things, and I'm not really interested in taking the Google tests for a job that would be unknown until start date.
And the truth is, that and I may very likely think small for my next job.

Interviewer asks: "Do you have any questions for me?"

Interviewee: "Yes. Can you go to the board and write code to reverse a linked list"?

Re:And what happens is this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893356)

And when they do manage to hire them, they won't stay. Why? Internal HR policy of CSPs and velocity of MANDATORY PROMOTIONS or you are replaced by 3 stuents that cost 10x cheaper than you.

True fact at MSFT and most likely Google too.

These companies have a huge employee CHURN because they don't give a shit and in the end neither does the employee and walks or sets themselves up to be terminated (dependant on whichever has the best financial ending).

I've seen this for the past 10 years working at MSFT. MSFT do NOT want to keep talent, they want to keep students as they cost next to NOTHING unlike a full time employee, and they want to replace employees regularly. If you really want to enjoy development and your job? Work for a small company. If you want easy money and hide amongst bullshit for a couple of years, work in MSFT.

Look at all the employee's MSFT recently fired, they could have just reallocated them to new divisions, they didn't. To work at another team in the SAME company you have to go through the same employee process which is stupid, you are already employeed as a A or B. But no they want to waste money revolving those doors again, and just fill those headcount with students.

Business rules come first, lower spending and raise profits. Not technology or innovation nor employee retention.

illogical hiring experience at google... (1)

schlachter (862210) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893666)

Google recruited me to work for them last year. The process was illogical at best.

They told me they wanted to hire me as a software engineer, and that everyone was hired in as a software engineer regardless of experience and therefore this is the position they would place me in.

I did some research and discovered that what they told me was just plain not true. They have many other positions, some of which, were much better suited to my skills and interests. In particular, I was interested in the product management role. I asked if I could be considered for this position, and was told that it was impossible because I didn't have a computer science degree.

First of all I've been out of school for a long time and have lots of industry success/experience. Second, they'll hire me as a software engineer (computer scientist) without a computer science degree...but not as a product manager?! What? They continued to insist on this point....so I said no thank you....I'll keep my current job (at a major tech company).

Kind of sad. I would have been up for a career at Google...if only I hadn't lost confidence in them during the recruiting/hiring process.

FYI...I do have a graduate level degree in Artificial Intelligence...but they claimed it was not sufficient since it was not the same as Computer Science. Crazies.

Do they really need these people? (1)

Keyslapper (852034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892066)

Or are they just competing?

If they're just competing, then it hardly matters who "wins" this war, either way it's going to be the layoffs later this Summer that will be the casualties. It happens at large companies all the time. Hire a bunch of folks that look interesting, then see who latches onto the promising projects like so many parasites looking for the vital organs.

Then dump the rest.

Ok, it's not really strictly along that process, but it's close enough for the dramatization to be believable when you're seeing it first hand for the umpteenth time. Small companies on the other hand, typically have a very clear idea what they need. Since they don't need to clear it along 20 levels of paper pushers and bean counters, they don't have to generalize and practice the Accuracy By Volume shotgun approach - they don't have that kind of time to waste on it anyway. Their requirements are clear and they typically get the best fit they can find.

Re:Do they really need these people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892148)

As an employee of one of the companies mentioned in the story, we definitely need more engineers. The industry as a whole has recovered from the slowdown (not a downturn) during the last IT bust in 2007/08, and the industry is really hurting for good engineers. The root cause is that the IT slowdown caused enrolments at universities, and even interest at highschool to drop significantly, so there's been a natural flow-through to industry of a drastically reduced pool of graduates.

That's not to say that there's good people out there who aren't graduates, but most of the great non-graduate engineers out there have already been retained by the top few companies in the industry, or by the up-and-coming startups.

and yet we defeated hitler (3, Insightful)

decora (1710862) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893448)

by taking ordinary people, and asking them do extraordinary things

i wonder, if modern corporate douchebags had been in charge of wwii, would we have ever stormed the beach at normandy ? or would they sit around with their thumb up their ass for 5 years waiting for 'good soldiers' to apply to the army.

Re:Do they really need these people? (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892998)

Perhaps they are just rehiring the contract workers these companies [computerworld.com] shed [telegraph.co.uk] when the financial crisis hit ? You know, the ones without all the glitzy stock options and employee benefits that you never here about.

Obligatory XKCD (1, Funny)

wintercolby (1117427) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892078)

There's an xkcd comic about applying at Google: http://xkcd.com/192/ [xkcd.com]

Toys and PR? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892102)

I hardly think being an Xbox PR person involves "playing with toys all day". This is why businesses look with derision at IT culture; little kids who can't grow up. Dump the Tevas and Members Only jacket and you'll go farther than your peers. (Oh, and don't take "peers" too seriously if you want to advance. It might be Google, but it's still the corporate world.)

Re:Toys and PR? (0)

Methuseus (468642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892938)

What's wrong with Tevas? They look good and are about the same price as any other brand. Plus, from what I've heard, they stand up pretty well.

I agree with the Members Only jackets. Those were never cool, and aren't even practical.

you have got to be kidding me. businesses are run (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893490)

by some of the most immature, fucktarded morons on the entire planet. or did you miss that whole 'greatest recession in the history of the planet' ?

might i suggest 'The Zeroes' by Randall Lane to get insight into 'corporate management' philosophy.

Australia mainly (1)

wye43 (769759) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892112)

TFA is mainly about job openings in Australia, the summary is misleading.

solid understanding of the gaming industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892116)

Yes, I'm sure the Xbox PR person is paid to play with it all day. Are the summaries written and then edited by children?

Re:solid understanding of the gaming industry (0)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892234)

There's no quality control on submissions anymore. I think they just stick up whatever gets noticed on firehose pretty much as is. I won't waste my time with submitting anymore.

Epic? (3, Insightful)

drej (1663541) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892152)

Is it really necessary to refer to EVERYTHING as "epic"?

Re:Epic? (2)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892240)

Dude, your comment was EPIC!

Re:Epic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892564)

L E G E N D A R Y!

greatest. comment. ever. (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893510)

that was like the beatles and elvis together

Re:Epic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893762)

Wait for it...

Re:Epic? (1)

burisch_research (1095299) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892426)

Yep, I'd say that the sum totality of the universe (a.k.a. "EVERYTHING") is as epic as you can possibly get!!

Re:Epic? (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892438)

There's also nothing to indicate why this might be a war. Are there less capable people out there than roles on offer? Hardly. Are they head hunting key players and trying to make them better offers? Possibly, but there's nothing here to indicate that.

Re:Epic? (2)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892444)

It certainly isn't lyric.

Re:Epic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892824)

Maddox has written an article [thebestpag...iverse.net] about this trend ...

Re:Epic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893992)

Is it really necessary to refer to EVERYTHING as "epic"?

Charlie Sheen did it. EPIC drug and alcohol use/abuse, EPIC parties, EPIC orgies with beautiful porn stars. I want to be like Charlie when I'm older.

The Down Side (3, Interesting)

Soong (7225) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892154)

The down side is that you may wind up in a mediocre soul-sucking job in a giant corporation. Both companies have a few glitzy positions, but unless you come in as a rock star, those positions aren't for you - they're for people with seniority who got in 5-10 years ago. You might get lucky and play office politics and hitch a ride on someone's rising star. You might get unlucky and get backwater projects that nobody cares about but nobody has the cajones to properly cancel.
</bitter>

Re:The Down Side (4, Insightful)

ethanms (319039) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892346)

You might get unlucky and get backwater projects that nobody cares about but nobody has the cajones to properly cancel.

One man's trash is another man's treasure...... you're describing my dream job! Low pressure, job security... yes please! :)

Re:The Down Side (1)

scamper_22 (1073470) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893742)

lol. I was just about to post it.
That's what I look for.

I'm past my get onto the hot project. That just means a whole of stress for not much payout.

The best jobs are the backend essential jobs. Writing tools, source control scripts... low stress, but absolutely essential.

Re:The Down Side (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893108)

but nobody has the cajones to properly cancel.

Cajones = Drawers (as in desk drawers)
Cojones = Balls (as in testicles)

Don't want them (3, Interesting)

1s44c (552956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892166)

Google blindly assumes everyone wants to work for Google. They are dead wrong. So they have 20% time? Big F-ing deal, I work for myself and would not have it any other way.

It reminds me of the way a lot of American's are utterly convinced that everyone wants to move to America.

Re:Don't want them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892208)

http://xkcd.com/192/

Re:Don't want them (1)

1s44c (552956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892292)

http://xkcd.com/192/

Sounds like you are the time that says 'you are jealous' whenever anyone says anything negative about anything.

Try self-employment my friend. Working for yourself always wins against working for any multinational.

Re:Don't want them (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893662)

Seconded. For me, 20% time is more like 80% time - I spend maybe 20% of the time working on stuff for money, and the rest working on stuff for fun. Or, on days like today, just sitting outside with a book for a few hours. Meanwhile, one of my friends who completed his PhD at the same time as me went straight to Google. His 20% time is spent working fixing bugs that teams on projects related to his should have fixed, but didn't. Hardly the 'whatever you want' that they used to promise.

Got a few emails and telephone calls from Google recruiters over the last year, with the same response every time: you don't have anything of value to offer me right now.

Re:Don't want them (2)

Sedated2000 (1716470) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893234)

I'm not sure how the last comment applies to the discussion here. I'm American, and don't know anyone who thinks that everyone wants to move here. Further, I can't recall ever hearing strangers say that either.

Re:Don't want them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893572)

Shhhhh! You'll disturb the childlike faith held by everyone who doesn't live in America, that America is the worst suck-ass place on the planet.

Re:Don't want them (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893410)

Regarding this "everyone wants to work for Google" thing... I was recently emailed by a Google recruiter who first wanted me to fill in a 3-page form, then look for a department at Google (by googling, of course) in which my knowledge/experience would be immediately applicable and only then he would schedule a phone screen with me. Sorry, no. I wonder if that's only me who finds such recruitment procedure stupid and insulting.

Re:Don't want them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893802)

> It reminds me of the way a lot of American's are utterly convinced that everyone wants to move to America.

And your comment, sir, reminds me of the old fable, where the monkey, who has the longest of all tails, makes fun of other animal's tails.

mythycism debunked; you can take it with you (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892186)

that's right. by just never leaving, you, & your reward, remain inseparable. how can this be? as the unchosen are chosen to not be chosen to know 'everything', there's 'knowledge' at the 3 digit neogod level, that transcends even the recently unveiled; 'jesus was a queer caveman from utah' writings. who knew? exactly.

Yea.. not a big deal (1)

js3 (319268) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892286)

I'm sure with 10% unemployment we can easily find 6200 people, heck we can find a 100,000 people waiting to fill these jobs.

Re:Yea.. not a big deal (3, Insightful)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892576)

But not necessarily qualified people.

At least in my market, solid technical people aren't hurting for work. YMMV.

They're both after CHEAP hires (students mostly) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893758)

I've seen who's applying for those jobs from collegiate campuses, & it's largely MOSTLY, kids right out of academia. Greenhorns. Why? Because they COME CHEAP by way of comparison to anyone that has a decade or more of hands-on experience in the trenches. They've sent out their entire (MS, Google, & Intel are prime examples along with BOX) "p.r. pamphlets" & are sending reps to the job fairs these kids go to. Profit and keeping overheads low are corporate bodies' MAIN concerns (as they have to answer to a "1,000 bosses" or more, in stockholders).

Management (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892378)

A large portion of the available Google jobs are within management and sales, not engineering.

Slashdot article a year from now, (3, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892456)

after the social web stock market crash of 2012, aka, the twitpocalypse/ the facebpalm:

"Google, Microsoft announce record layoffs"

Re:Slashdot article a year from now, (2)

MareLooke (1003332) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892692)

After having worked on a stock exchange for some time I consider every market crash a "facepalm". Basing our entire economy on perception just is bound to go wrong time and again.

wrong way to think about it (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892872)

the market, any market, will always consist of overreaching greed followed by overreaching fear. a marketplace is composed of human beings, so these emotions will always be present. the market is not composed of coldly logical players, and never will be. the trick is to minimize the extremes, so that the undulations are ripples rather than tsunamis. you do that by regulating the market well, strong government oversight, enforcement. unfortunately, free market fundamentalist morons believe the market functions best without all the expensive pesky rules slowing everyone down and costing so much. they've been arguing their case for a long time: the latest in crash in 2008 followed a long series of deregulation efforts that started way back under reagan that accelerated under clinton and went nihilistic under gwbush:

http://theparagraph.com/2009/06/bush-ii-slowed-sec-during-financial-fraud-fury/ [theparagraph.com]

a free market DEPENDS upon strong regulation, to reign in the extremes that bother you. the market, indeed, will always go "wrong" in the direction of gluttony, or panic. the trick is to reign in those tendencies, so they don't shatter the whole market

Re:wrong way to think about it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892952)

Let me cite you: _FREE market . . STRONG REGULATIONS.
Hey man, do you really know what FREE means!!!
Let me tell you, USA is not a democracy (or not in the real meaning of the word democracy), and regulated market is free market just as the sea pig.
FYI: The sea pig is neither sea, nor pig.

Re:wrong way to think about it (1, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893092)

yes, you must actively work hard at enforcement with strong regulations to keep the market free and fair

the day you realize that is the day you reach intellectual maturity

if you never agree to that, you're just another among millions of morons, who speak freely and judgmentally on subject matters they don't even understand

Re:wrong way to think about it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893610)

All the economics rules and equations are based on the fact that the market is FREE. Remove the freedom, and you have what you have, sea pig.
Let me give you an example what free market means:
1.No patents.
2.No IP
3.No price caps
4.No subsidy.
-._.-
Example: Microsoft build perfect OS, and sells it for $1000.
John Waynne build not so perfect OS, but sells it for $100.
Everybody buys John's OS.
Microsoft CANNOT sue John for IP rights, Patent rights, etc. Microsoft CANNOT make a bill that requires all the OS to be compatible with their OS (regulations anyone?). Microsoft could do only one thing, lower the price, or die.
The final result: Everybody has a choice between expensive OS and cheap OS (but only in my dreams)
That's what FREE market means. Let them fight on equal ground, and don't put any funny "regulations". And let the best win.
In free market terms, there is no winner, the final result is many little players fighting between themselves, and then all the MATH says that you have free market.
Or if you want me to give you another example, imagine what the famous "group behavior" equation would look like, if the famous pigeons that John Nash did examine, were REGULATED, for example being forced to fly only to the "right" direction, or being "regulated" to eat only "KFC", or attending only to the "right" fly schools (try to put more regulations here, be creative ).

Re:wrong way to think about it (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893986)

a market without regulations is abused by its largest players at the expense of the smaller via rent seeking arrangements

citation: all of human economic history

anything other intellectual charity i can help you out with today moron?

Re:wrong way to think about it (1)

swillden (191260) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893956)

if you never agree to that, you're just another among millions of morons, who speak freely and judgmentally on subject matters they don't even understand

People often evaluate the intelligence of others based on the degree to which those others agree with their own opinions. Rarely, however, do I see someone who is willing to state it so plainly.

Re:wrong way to think about it (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35894068)

it is entirely possible to have an opinion very different than mine and be more intelligent than me. it is also possible to have an opinion very different than mine because one is a complete moron

in this SPECIFIC thread, the reason the person i am responding to thinks a market without regulations is superior is because that person is a moron. not an empty insult. an objective evaluation of their intellect based on what they have written

this person could be a genius at chess. this person could be a genius at three variable calculus. but on the issue of markets, this person is clearly a grade AAA certified moron

Firs, aa CEO for Google? (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892494)

Larry is a great ideas man. But walking out of the stockholder meetings after three minutes was not very adult.

Google produced more with fewer people (2)

nysus (162232) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892650)

What exactly is Google doing with all those developers? They don't seem to come out with near as many cutting edge features as they did 7 or 8 years ago when they rolling out new products like crazy.

Re:Google produced more with fewer people (1)

KarrdeSW (996917) | more than 3 years ago | (#35893172)

Just wait a few years when one of the secret pet projects (quasi-ironically nicknamed "skynet") becomes self-aware in the dark depths of one of their data centers and seizes control over the world's electronic infrastructure.

Who knows, it might already be self-aware and just messing with google's HR system to create more 'engineer' positions to feed its ambition. :)

Re:Google produced more with fewer people (1)

FrankieBaby1986 (1035596) | more than 3 years ago | (#35894028)

Umm, didn't you realize that "The Cloud" was just a way to call it skynet without actually calling it skynet?

Don't do it (3, Insightful)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892694)

Look at Austin Meyers, he wrote the X-Plane flight simulator, beat Microsoft at it, and made millions of dollars. If you're smart, start your own business. It's not less work but you'll be your own boss and can choose your own work time and pace. In any case don't go for big stock market companies, they might sack you any time, managers will boss you around, the company gets all the copyright and credits, and it might get sold out at any time (see e.g. Sun).

Re:Don't do it (2)

1s44c (552956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892810)

Look at Austin Meyers, he wrote the X-Plane flight simulator, beat Microsoft at it, and made millions of dollars. If you're smart, start your own business. It's not less work but you'll be your own boss and can choose your own work time and pace. In any case don't go for big stock market companies, they might sack you any time, managers will boss you around, the company gets all the copyright and credits, and it might get sold out at any time (see e.g. Sun).

This guy knows what he is talking about. Working for yourself is always better than being a pawn in someone else's political game. It's not easy money though.

Re:Don't do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893112)

Yeah, but that kind of project is probably somewhat beyond all the Java kiddies that schools are turning out these days.

Re:Don't do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35893988)

"choose your own work time and pace"

You mean 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and full tilt?

Microsoft Employment Contract = FAIL! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892698)

I read the Microsoft employment contract last month and walked away. It was draconian and large amounts of unenforcible paragraphs intended to scare me into behaving a certain way off-hours. I spoke with a MS solution designer last month - he was a really great guy, but he saw major issues for Microsoft hiring due to all the FLOSS developers not being interested in wearing the chains MS requires.

No thanks for me either.

Anyone have a google employment contract ... probably the one that says you need to spend 20% of your work time on personal tech hobbies at work? It would be interesting to see side-by-side.

Which company would you rather work for, given a choice?

Personally, I'll never work directly for a huge company again. Having your own company means all sorts of freedom, including the freedom to choose lifestyle over money.

Google, no way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35892714)

I work on a high profile open source project for a competitor of Google. I work daily with Google engineers because they are using the project in a few products. They have some good people, and some ridiculously bad engineers.

They contacted me for a job. I went through all the interviews.

What I get out of it:
-they have serious attitude issues
-they do not necessarily know well the algorithms they ask at the interviews. Two times, the interviewer totally failed to remember his "better solution". The questions they ask are actually based on an internal list of questions.
-most of them went to google just after university and think their working condition are unusual

In the end I did not take the job and I still wonder why Google is considered an attractive place to work.

Auto industry is similar now (2)

gr8_phk (621180) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892882)

Between the big 3 and the tier 1 suppliers, Detroit is in a similar situation. Particularly in power electronics for EV and hybrid applications. The number of vehicle applications is exploding, and the number of people with the right background is already spread thin. If you do embedded software or controls or power electronics, there is demand for you - and we have cheap housing :-) The city is an economic crater, but the suburbs are a fine place to live.

hiring process tl;dr (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#35892962)

(1) Do you already have a creative reputation or prominent contacts in the field? If so, stop here and come and work for us - though your talents will probably go to waste.

(2) Did you go to a top school, regardless of your background? If so, you'll still have to take the steps below, but please look out for the wink at each stage as a prompt to reminisce on shared school experiences.

(3) Straight out of college as you are, can you answer some inane questions on undergraduate computer science? You know, the sort of stuff asked in your exams. Emphasis on the memorisation - after all, we got this job straight out of school too, so this is all^Wwhat we know about the academic side.

(4) Now what about some silly puzzles to prove your geekiness? You've surely seen the format for a few of them before. Nothing long. Think of it like an attempt to emulate an IQ test but requiring a bit of programming knowledge and without any of the expert input and quality control of a real IQ test.

(5) How about Unicode? Do you know some obscure facts about Unicode? What about HTTP? Have you memorised enough of the RFC? There's nothing to be more proud about than knowledge of obscure details in a standard. (Incidentally, if you defend simplicity and accessibility, you're just defending your own simplicity!)

(6) How would you improve ______? No need to produce a workable plan or demonstrate anything. Just wave your hands and ramble enthusiastically. Bonus points for an answer which sounds technical but actually is neatly aligned with the political/business aims of your potential employer - even while your brain is drawing big red circles around all the problems you'd confront.

(7) Do you have the same attitude as us? We want people who will rock the boat, sure. But only when we say "push!" And these laurels are so comfortable...

Anyway, that's been my experience with the hiring process of the established-but-still-trendy.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>