The interview process began with an initial recruiter call, followed by a coding challenge, and then a six-round virtual on-site interview, which is pretty standard. The rounds covered LeetCode mediums, architecture, system design, and Linux internals.
Initially, the process went well. The first recruiter I dealt with was friendly and happy to answer any questions I had.
The virtual on-site interview was a bit of a mess, however. The schedule changed around multiple times, and they expected a serious time commitment. I didn’t receive an offer, which is fine. But despite asking multiple times, I never received any feedback. I just received a repeated canned response stating, "You're evaluated against a set of criteria and didn't meet the standard."
That’s pretty awful. After spending eight hours interviewing (and several more studying for the on-site), you can't even provide some feedback for improvement?
I like Apple's products, but I'd never consider going through this process again, even for the decent salaries on offer.
Three rounds of LeetCode Medium.
System design, architecture, Linux internals, and debugging.
The following metrics were computed from 4 interview experiences for the Apple Site Reliability Engineer role in London, United Kingdom.
Apple's interview process for their Site Reliability Engineer roles in London, the United Kingdom is very selective, failing most engineers who go through it.
Candidates reported having very good feelings for Apple's Site Reliability Engineer interview process in London, United Kingdom.