Pros: Good benefit, you can work until retirement.

Cons: It is too bureaucratic.

Pros: Diverse range of products, technologies, and skills. A very good place to have a broad range of skills. Reasonable work/life balance, though it might vary team to team. You will get to work with very smart people. Good benefits: Pay, Paternity/Maternity leaves, 401k match, ESPP, Stock, a good number of days of vacation, dental benefits are reasonable, and health benefits are okay, I guess. However, the way they are rolling out the changes is horrible. Good social and environmental consciousness.

Cons: 1. HR policies always seem to favor managers over employees. See details below. 2. Mobility is limited, as managers have to be notified before interviewing with other teams. 3. Even after the latest round of review changes, employees don't get transparent information about their performance and promotions. Managers get to distribute bonuses and increases based on unknown processes. Promotions were always a mystery. 4. Managers have a tight grip over projects/assignments an employee gets. Employees don't have much freedom to openly work on projects that they like. 5. No team spirit or culture. I have seen ideas get stolen/copied, and the originators never credited multiple times. 6. New health benefits changes are a disaster. Not only are we out thousands of dollars every year, the paperwork takes up a few hours every month. 7. Senior management has no clue what they are up to. Ballmer was a joke when it came to decision making/strategy. Yes, we have a new CEO. Let's see how he shakes things up. 8. Crony culture in senior management is painfully obvious. See what happened to Sinofsky and his lieutenants. 10. Career progress depends on how well you are liked by your manager and skip-level manager. 11. Very weak product management culture. Unused/incomplete features, multiple UIs, hard-to-use features, ...

Pros: Good company with plenty of opportunities and good benefits.

Cons: Although they are working on it, the yearly performance review system just plain sucks. They used a bell curve ranking system reminiscent of high school, thus, in order for someone to exceed, someone must fail, even if that person was an otherwise good and skilled worker. The review system also tends to favor the butt kissers and brown nosers more than the people with actual technical talent and skill that are making the products successful. Do a good job, meet all your deadlines, and solve all the problems, and you'll be rewarded as "average". But if you cc upper management in every email, bragging about your minor accomplishments, you get rewarded, even if you failed to meet many deadlines and couldn't finish half your tasks.