The Worst Workspaces In Tech

nicholas.m.carlson writes help you feel better about your hovel. Vallywag recently compiled a list of the top ten places to work, but the resulting submissions and exploration also provided them with an interesting look at some of the worst places to work. "What makes them so bad? Some offend with exposed fluorescent lights, gray cubicles and a dystopian corporate sheen. But others, with their pseudo-hip graffiti, kindergarten toys and plastic decorations — all in a desperate attempt to seem 'Internet-y' — come off even worse."

Comments

Not so bad.

[suso]

I think some of these people doing this review are a bit spoiled. They are used to their private cubicals, posh offices, etc.

At least most of the people in these environments have new workstations, a monitor or two and some deskspace.

The don't show the tech business running out of a cockroach infested hotel room with 10 year old computers using dial up to connect to the net.

Interesting.

[Slashdot Suxxors]

The List: -Yahoo
-Mozilla
-Mahalo
-Google
-Microsoft
-LinkedIn
-Jajah
-Facebook
-DoubleClick
-Adobe

I find it funny how they say Google is one of the worst places to work, yet everyone seems to want to work there.

does it really matter?

[Alien Being]

As a college dropout (A's in CS, fsck philosophy), it was tough getting my foot in the door. One mistake I made along the way was letting a risk-taker scare me off with stories of sometimes having to work in boiler room type surroundings.

If it's good work, the atmosphere becomes almost invisible. Some of the best companies in history started in a garage and some of the worst started atop skyscrapers.

Is that the worst they could come up with?

[Llywelyn]

Grey cubicles at Google, seriously?

I had a boss who worked for a company that referred to the owner of the company as "Lord Vader" because she was utterly insane. It had a turnover rate that was prettymuch total on a yearly basis.

I had to work once a week for a while in a warehouse in a metal chair with no one else around and an ancient piece of computer technology.

There is at least one game company that seems to have a vested interest in driving its employees into the ground and treating them like children.

I know another place that had computer technology that was so out of date it could barely run the software we were developing.

I am not sure if any of these constitute the "worst" places to work, or even how they rate to the companies listed in the article, but surely there are worse things out there than the horror of grey cubicles.

Re:Irrelevant Pictures and Inaccuracies

[Skim123]

I was an intern at Microsoft back in the last millenia and had my own private office half the summer, with a door and a 24" monitor. The other half of the summer I shared that office with another employee.

I've been to the Redmond campus a half dozen times since then, and the place is still one of the most appealing work environments I've ever seen.

These are bad workspaces?

[DesScorp]

Are you kidding me?

I don't think these people have ever seen bad workspaces. Adobe is "unfriendly"? They have lots of light, lots of space, good furniture, palm trees... oh yeah, they have a fsckin' basketball court. Piss poor facilities, obviously.

Of all of the "bad" choices, only facebook's could possibly deserve to be on that list, as it looks like a high school cafeteria with monitors. Otherwise... I'd say the problem is that the tastes of the Valleywag people are ridiculous.

Re:Irrelevant Pictures and Inaccuracies

[Dutch Gun]

I have to agree, I've worked at Microsoft twice as a temp programmer. The first time I had a private office, the next I shared an office. Bad place to work? Hardly. And what's really hilarious is those photos are of the Washington State Convention Center, not of the Microsoft campus. BTW, the convention center is really nice too. To hold *conventions* in, that is.

And I can't believe Google was listed because of a "kindergarden" design motif. Holy crap, who gives a flying f***? Smells like a quick throw-together article, with listings designed to draw ire (and thus page hits).

Sorry, when you can't even get basic facts correct, I can't believe much else you say or show either.