Slashdot Mirror
Google Vs. Microsoft: a Tale of Two Interviews
jfruh writes "You might be a bit jealous of Andrew Weiss: fresh out of college, he got interviews with both Microsoft and Google. He discusses (to the extent NDAs allow) the differences between the two experiences, ranging from the silly (Google's famous gourmet cafeteria vs. Microsoft's gaming room) to the serious (Google's technical emphasis vs. Microsoft's focus on explanatory and consulting skills.)"
Why so many?
Sounds like huge pain in the ass. I get irritated if interviews run more than 1 hour. If you want my time, pay me for it.
Google is wanting to you to be technical and MS only cares about how well you can talk.
Which only goes to show that Google cares about the tech stuff, and MS just cares to make money.
Not saying that Google doesn't want money, but it doesn't seem to be all that matters to them.
MS on the other hand, that is all that matters to them.
Be seeing you...
Hmm... why would someone be jealous? If you want to be in that situation, Google and Microsoft are pretty straightforward. Go to one of the colleges they approach candidates from (and while US college system is a bit silly, anyone CAN go to on of these colleges if they try hard enough and are willing to pile up enough debts...most countries will have a way for people who worked hard enough), and then just talk to them. Then if you have a 3.0 gpa and don't babble too much, you'll probably get the job (if you want to). If you don't, get a job elsewhere and they'll be harassing you a few years later.
My silly community college IT degree didn't catch their attention, but that was a personal decision I made. My wife however made different decision and Google/Microsoft are calling her at least once a month.
I guess in some countries it might not be as trivial, but i doubt the summary was thinking of those when it was written.
Aside that, if you're "jealous", you just didn't make the right decisions to get what you wanted.
He went in unprepared for possible the toughest IT interview of his life and he did not get the position. BIG SURPRISE. then he had some job leads spoon fed to him, interviewed at a few other places and nailed the MS interview. the end. saved you the 45 seconds it takes to read it. the position at MS was more MIS/marketing, and they asked "softer" questions, big whoop. Just some ivy league brat who didn't nail his first interview, and wanted a way to bitch.
Having been an intern at both, and gone through at least the intern version of their interviews, I didn't see a huge difference. Can you solve problems? How do you approach different types of problems? Simply put, did your education (both formal and personal) teach you enough to know the important things that any software engineer should know? Communication is incredibly important, and your ability to communicate how you are solving the problems and dealing with issues factors in quite a bit.
Once inside, they do have different cultures, goals, focus, but as far as getting in, I feel there's very few people who would be hired by one, but not the other.
You want a job? Pay for it with you time.
I thought this article might actually be interesting. Instead, it was just shit. I suck at one interview, and got good, and did good on the next one. This one was almost as worse as the one about taking your kid to the forest for school.
21st Century Renaissance Man
I've rarely interviewed more than once for a job, never 3 times. And got every job I ever wanted (there were some I didn't want I got and some I didn't want I didn't get). Either
1) I am a super mega-uber-super-fantastic-interviewee and you are a loser or
2) different companies hire in different ways.
The number of interviews is meaningless.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
I have a dozen or so former classmates working at Microsoft and they had 2 on-site interviews max.
I have a job I like, pays well and lets me set my own hours. You have to convince me to come work for you.
One of the unique aspects of my time in Redmond was the interview environment. In between interviews, I was in a room filled with music, video games, and movies. While it may sound unheard of, it actually worked in my favor helping to keep my mind off things for a bit.
Entry interview: you'll need to dodge alien laser beams.
Exit interview: you'll need to dodge flying chairs.
I agree, making a profit is immoral! It might be better to just get a doctorate and work at a university, at least then he can expand knowledge without exploiting anyone.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
No job offer then?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Here's my experience in Google vs Amazon
In summary, Google's interviews don't get a flying rats behind about anything but microbenchmarks on small pieces of code. Amazon cared more about technical design but started asking me questions on the Linux Kernel (I was applying for Java Engineer position)
Some more odds:
One of the Google interviews disagreed with me that a Java HashSet was not Big O(1) for the contains() method when I wrote out my sample code. I pointed out (very kindly) that I believe HashSet is backed by HashMap in Java, which is constant time. He said he didn't think that was true and I conceded and said, "I can assume then for now that it is not constant time then." I was extremely polite, but I'm fairly certain that cost me the job.
The Amazon interview didn't go after they started asking me the internals of the Linux kernel. Then, the gentlemen asked me to implement a C function. I stopped him immediately after he was done speaking and said, "There must be a mistake, while i'm more than willing to attempt this in C, I thought I was applying for a Java position." He said he didn't know Java and asked me to implement atoi() in Java then. Needless to say he wasn't satisfied with any iteration of my Java code and made it a point that C was far superior to Java when we were done.
I really wanted the Google job, and I feel I was definitely qualified. What makes me feel better about it I guess is that it seems some Googlers couldn't pass the Google interview.
Congratulations, I assume you're not applying then. If you're the best candidate you'll likely have been actively recruited and bypass half the interviews. If you're not the very best candidate then the onus is on you to prove yourself to the employer, not the other way around.
You mean in one day, or 3 separate visits? If you don't get an offer after the first visit with Google, you got rated poorly by someone.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Well, that was a fairly lame article...
Anyway, I interviewed with Microsoft back in 1989 or 1990, and it appears that things have changed since then. Back then, they definitely were more focused on technical questions. I don't remember anyone asking anything about customers or business or communications. It was all technology, with a bit of design thrown in. The position wasn't even a hard-core programming job. Since I was a few years out of college, the customer/business/communications questions would have been nice, since I would probably would have been better positioned to answer those than the college seniors, as my then current job had me working with customers a lot. Their recruiting group was horribly disorganized back then also -- they switched recruiters and the job at the last minute, so no one (myself, the recruiter, the interviewers) was properly prepared. I suppose they've probably fixed that since then... One of the weirdest things was the "cult of Bill" -- whenever you asked a question, the answer seemed to always be prefaced with something like, "Well, Bill thinks that..." Even questions that had nothing to do with technology or Microsoft, like "what do people in Redmond do for fun?" "Well, Bill thinks that being fit and active helps the brain, so a lot of us like to mountain bike..."
The MS job was about business skills and Google was about tech skills.
Now to be fair we need to have tech job at MS vs tech job at goolge.
But this maybe telling that college CS is not good for some tech job at least at MS but the same CS is what google may want for tech jobs.
I think that MS is better as they see that CS is NOT IT.
You have a Microsoft? Me too!
i wonder who has the third one.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Maybe he is doing both.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
"Hmm... why would someone be jealous?"
Not to mention that I'm sure both Google and Microsoft employee plenty of minimum wage workers... those campuses don't clean themselves (yet) as well as hordes of junior level monkeys, clerks, secretaries, etc. Just getting an interview at a company isn't all that impressive unless it's a high-up job that falls into the "dream job" category for thousands or millions of people.
lol
Who is this insanely awesome employer of yours?
From what I've gathered so far: they hire clueless idiots who spend all day posting banalities on the 'net, pay them excessively, and don't force a standard workday.
For the love of god please clue us in.
I have a few friends at both places. At MS, the style and topics of an interview can change from team to team, and from internal organization to organization. From what I hear, at Google it's a little different in that you get interviewed by a wide variety of folks, and then teams "bid" on you based on your interview results and strengths/weaknesses, so the technical interview experience there is largely the same for every candidate.
"False hope is why we'll never run out of natural resources!" - Lewis Black
Or they changed job requirements part way through and are still interested in you for a related position but not the specific job they were looking for before.
Not to mention that I'm sure both Google and Microsoft employ plenty of minimum wage workers...
Actually Google singlehandedly raised the "minimum wage" across the Silicon Valley back in the day with all other tech giants having to catch up to avoid losing talent... don't sound so bitter man...
Bow before me, for I am root.
Why so many? Sounds like huge pain in the ass. I get irritated if interviews run more than 1 hour. If you want my time, pay me for it.
Agreed. They may be the top of the prestige ladder, but google and microsoft are both places where you'll be expected to put in long hours for average pay. Maybe the hours and hours of interviews is really just to determine who values their time the least?
I interviewed at MS while I was a grad student in math, and I was astounded at the experience. While the HR guy who interviewed me on campus and then flew me to Redmond was very positive, upbeat, and encouraging, the only thing I can think about the engineer who interviewed me is: "What an asshole." He would ask me a question, then while I answered he would turn his back to me, face his computer and answer email.
I was bright and eager and thought it would be fun to move across the country and stop being a starving student, but even at that young age I new I could never work for a company that treated me like garbage while trying to woo me!
I dunno. I was the last on-campus interviewee before lunch, and maybe the recruiter wanted one invite under his belt before he went out and drank his lunch, so maybe I really was unqualified.
Many technical companies will do several hour long interviews. Interviewing is difficult, and that want to spend some time to get it right. If you want the job, you'll take the time... otherwise stay with your current job.
I've interviewed at Google, and at Microsoft, as well as a few other technical places, for similar positions. The interview process was very similar. Stand in front of a white board, solve and then code a small problem. Or discuss design. I think the biggest difference is lunch was not exactly an interview with Google, but it was with Microsoft.
I agree. I don't know why anyone post that stuff other then just silly trolling. Although it can be worse as I remember when some people posted scary images on /.
I was very interested to read your post, having just recently interviewed with both Amazon and Google.
Here's my experience with each. Amazon was four 45-minute interviews, with a 15 minute break between each. Clearly they had decided on the problems for each candidate beforehand, as each interviewer asked a different question or two about my previous experiences and then a technical question that took the remainder of the interview time. I was also given the opportunity to ask about their experiences, which was actually quite illuminating as it was clear their past projects heavily influenced each technical question they asked.
Google was five hour-long interviews with only a minute break or so between them. Additionally, there was an hour-long guided lunch after the third interview. My first interviewer gave me a rundown of how the process worked (in particular, they had a sheet keeping track of what problems I had been asked that was passed on to each subsequent interviewer) and then each interview pretty much was 100% dedicated to solving a technical problem. The only person who asked anything about my previous experience and gave me any information about the workplace culture was my lunchtime interviewer. From what I gathered, it sounds like after a training session most developers are put into an interview rotation, which I suppose makes sense when one considers the number of applicants they must have. As a result, my last interview also had an observer present, presumably in training.
I won't talk about the questions asked except to indicate that both companies asked interesting and engaging technical questions - only one of which (Google's "warm up question") I'd seen on glassdoor or other interview question lists. But Amazon seemed much more interested in my experience in addition to my technical abilities, whereas talking to Google was more like taking a standardized exam.
I once had to go through 3 on-site interviews for a job, they had me interview with a pair of front-line programmers, next a manager who I would have worked for, then finally the ceo (obviously a small place if the ceo is interviewing you but I like working for small companies). The first was on one day, the next two were the next day but not at the same time and I made a seperate trip. I was very fed up by the time I met with the ceo and was being roundly praised but still didn't have a job offer, EVEN after the ceo! When they finally offered me the job I turned it down because I'd taken on a contract that paid more and was done entirely over the phone in a single call.
When I interviewed at Google, I was struck by how my main interviewer had no work life balance after he moved to Google. He talked about all of the things he used to do - hiking, mountain biking, etc. When I talked to him in more detail about some of his favorite hikes and rides, it became apparent that they were all done before he went to Google and that he no longer has time. Then as I talked to the rest of the team members I found the same thing - their lives revolve around Google. And as I looked around I saw all of the great amenities that are geared toward keeping you on-campus - great food, free laundry, haircuts, oil changes, gym, swimming pool, etc. You could literally live at the office and have everything you need.
That's when I realized that I didn't want to work there. They wanted to bring me back for another interview for a team member that wasn't there for the first one, but I declined and took another job.
You misunderstood the discussion. An interview loop at Microsoft is a *loop* because you are routed past multiple interviewers with different questions and emphases. That is, all in one day. Three interviews is a typical start (taking up the morning), and if you have a shot after that, you'll be sent to additional interviewers. It sounds like Google works the same way.
*** "Freiheit ist immer die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden". -- Rosa Luxemburg ***
Three on-site interviews means an employer with a massive decision making disorder. They are doomed to fail. Run for your life.
I know people who work for these companies. What you say here is absolutely not true.
He was interviewing for different positions in the 2 companies.
Probably a developer post in Google and a consultant post in Microsoft. Microsoft's interviews for the product developer post are fully technical.
OP didn't qualify the statement. It sounded like OP saying all interviews were 3 or more in a day which is false.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
This question was asked to me years ago in a Microsoft interview, and has been bugging me since. I am curious as to what other people here on /. would have responded, and more importanly, the 'why' behind the response.
Here is the question:
Say I were to hire you today, and gave you the choice between two compensation packages, which one would you choose (and why)?
1: A standard salary of $100k
2: An hourly wage of 10 cents an hour - but every month that you worked here, we would double your hourly wage
Which would you prefer?
But then he'd miss his own comment!
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
I hear there's pills for that these days.
There's no need to go to the US -- Google and Microsoft (etc) recruit from other top universities.
While I was at Imperial College Google came about twice a year. Their London office was less than a mile away, but I'd be surprised if they didn't visit Cambridge, Oxford, UCL etc etc almost as often.
From what I've gathered so far: they hire clueless idiots who spend all day posting banalities on the 'net, pay them excessively, and don't force a standard workday.
For the love of god please clue us in.
I bet he edits /. summaries.
In most companies each person in the committee has his/her own style of questioning and sets of questions. So it would be quite a stretch to extrapolate from a few anecdotes about the interview to estimate the company policy. I know one guy who was fixated on the area of a 2D polygon and the point in-or-out test for a 2D polygon. There was another who would always ask for reversing a char string without temp storage, would not let go till he makes the interviewee agrees using recursion and double XOR is one hell of a trick. Then he would let the dazed applicant go with a self satisfied smile. Then there was this guy who was proud of scoring 800 in GRE analysis. All his questions would come out of mensa puzzle books. So unless your sample size is large, do not extrapolate from interview anecdotes to company policies.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Google is known to have the highest compensation in the entire industry. That's based on salary surveys, personal experience, and anecdotal knowledge.
Yeah, Google and Microsoft are massive failures at the moment.
Yeah the same thing happened to me. If you have to do a lot of interviews it doesn't mean the corporation is an awesome place to be. Just that it is so large that it has people who have to justify their paychecks by spending days interviewing people. Not exactly a sign of a productive environment I may add...
If you are an American then it doesn't matter because the job is going to an H1B.
I suspect that a large part of the 'interview` process is for the interviewer to pick the brains of the latest batch of graduates and then present the re-hashed new ideas as their own to senior management.
AccountKiller
well, one of the two appears to be. Time will tell, and not too much time either.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Why would they want anyone from Oxford? Are they going into government policy or public service? Never mind.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
Why so many?
Sounds like huge pain in the ass. I get irritated if interviews run more than 1 hour. If you want my time, pay me for it.
Going AC since frankly my work history is my own, and I'd rather not have any negative commentary that follows be pinned to current/past employers.
Frankly a bit surprised seeing people make comments of this sort... I strongly suspect most of the folk making claims like this frankly either are naive and doing entry level (think university assistant admin where you're just starting out- which was usually hour to two, single interview in my experience), or blatantly arrogant (and perhaps a few who actually have skills to match their mouth, although the mouth usually offsets the skills).
~15 years in, I can't recall *ever* having a single hour interview w/ a company once beyond getting university positions- frankly unless they already know me very, very well (have worked w/ me and it's a formality), an hour isn't enough time to suss out the person and is a sign they frankly shouldn't be in charge of hiring since they don't know WTF they'yre doing. I say this coming from offers/interviewing w/ bigger names like google/intel/facebook to smaller like yelp/twitter, to early stage startups (think pre series A), all highly technical positions.
Each and every one has always been multi-hour, multiple person. The interviewing varies (sometimes technical grunts trying to verify skillset/ability to play nice with others), to soft-interviewing where they're the dept. head/CTO/CEO are trying to sell you on why you should join, and feel out your comp requirements- think salary vs equity preferences, if you're excited enough they can go lower, etc.
There is one sole exception that comes to mind, and it was for a well known company- in that case it was a 90 minute on the phone interview, sub-contracted position (think warm body provided by a HR firm), and mostly turned into me advising the client on what they should do for problems they were having, rather than them quizzing me. Took it (was interesting work, even if as a contracted warm body), but it was pretty obvious they weren't screening worth a damn, and that they were open to high turn over/canning rates (thus less of an investment for them, especially via the HR firm angle). Even then, that incident was an exception- the other times I've been in a similar scenario, it was always a more thorough validation; which frankly is fine, made it easier to demonstrate "and this is why you're not going to argue, and you're going to pay me exactly what I want if you want my skillset" ;)
Which is not to say you are unfit for the position. It's an indicator, but people get bad interview loops. Google knows this.
Ok, so.... not to say anything bad about IT, just... this is just about an IT job interview. I'm sure a MUCH more interesting story would be about an Engineering Interview. Additionally, this seems more an article that the submitter managed to land a hefty number of /. hits. Nothing to read here... please, for the sake of your brain and all organs involved in making a memory, move along.
"Associate Consultant at Microsoft" LOL!!!! Guess everybody has to start somewhere, though.
Average pay for a new Software Engineering BS grad is 80,000 USD? Microsoft was paying that in 2010. What are the above average companies paying and who are they?
I started at $60k for 30-35 hours a week at no-name company in PDX in 2006.. Cost of living is way less there than Redmond. I did a few phone interviews with MS back then, but they only wanted to start me at 68k or something like that. Though I'll admit having MS on my resume might have been better for my career in the long run, but I had a damn good time in Portland and I'm glad I got to live out most of my 20s with short working hours and a decent wad of cash in my pocket in a fun town.
I work 40 hours a week in Portland for around $20k, and I have pretty good time. I could only wonder how much fun i could be having making more money and working less hours.
An interview is a two way process.
Many of us wouldn't work for a company that had such a one sided view of things. I want a better job. The company wants the best employee. I'm happy to prove I'm the best employee, but they have to prove they're the best employer. If they want me to jump through hoops, then clearly they want a trained poodle and not an experienced software developer.
In that sense I agree with you. We're clearly not going to get on.
You have to be assertive. I think they wanted me because I was arguing heavily with the development boss of the whole product range and convinced him that my non-typical solution was better
If I was interviewing, this would impress me. I'd be inclined to argue because having people come up with alternative solutions and able to explain why theirs is better will generally lead to a better product.
I never saw them on campus in Swansea, but that didn't stop me and several others from getting an interview with them. I decided to work freelance for a few years and then return to academia, but a few of my contemporaries went to work there. Getting an interview at Google is really easy. Getting in is a bit harder. Once you get past the technical stages, they spend a lot of effort trying to work out which bit of the organisation you would fit in with. I was quite impressed with that part of their process. Unfortunately in my case all of the projects that looked interesting were in places that I didn't really want to work, but I got a more interesting offer a little bit later so it all worked out in the end.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I used to work at Microsoft (in 2 states other than Washington). There was one company that did the janitorial work. All the janitors worked for that company (not Microsoft). Another company did the Microsoft corporate security. All the security officers work for that company, not Microsoft. All the chefs and other kitchen workers are employed by another company (not Microsoft). The Microsoft Company Store is manned and managed by yet another company (not Microsoft). Even "half" of the people who worked in product support work for outside contracting companies, or as independent contractors. Since the sites I worked at provided mainly support (as opposed to product development), I can't say how many of the general population of the main Microsoft campuses were/are contractors or vendors. But I know the practice of hiring contractors and vendors was/is not exclusive to product support, because I see job postings all the time for contractor/vendor jobs within Microsoft product teams.
As low to the bottom of the corporate ladder as I was, in 2005, my rung was severed, and all of the front-line phone support was sent to India and Canada. So working for Microsoft at a minimum wage job is unlikely, if not impossible (unless things are really different in Washington state, or unless things have considerably changed where I was). I just worked at a Microsoft support site again for 9 months as a contractor, ending earlier this year, so I know they haven't changed in my state, at least.
having said all that, one likely can get a job at Microsoft for an admin-type position. I suspect those pay more than minimum wage, however, though maybe not that much more. I don't know if there is such a thing as a clerk at Microsoft, since automation through technology largely eliminated so many jobs of that type.
--something witty
Sure, I kind of assumed that went without saying. Actually, I think Google's interview capabilities are at a fairly low level of competency compared to a lot of places I've seen.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking