Pros: The benefits package cannot be beat. If you are risk-averse but still talented, it's a perfect opportunity for you. If you have an iota of entrepreneurial spirit, go elsewhere.

Cons: Many, if not most people you work with and meet, have only ever worked at one company: MICROSOFT. They believe that the Microsoft way is the ONLY way. They don't care to hear alternatives. Your mileage varies depending on who you report to. If you're reporting to someone solid, you can have a great experience and be positive that Microsoft is a FANTASTIC place, be promoted every 18 months, and think anyone who speaks negatively about Microsoft is nuts. If you're working for a poor manager, you'll encounter cronyism, politics, promotions that have no correlation to merit, and difficulty figuring out where your future at the company is, if any. Be prepared to be assigned to projects that don't make a lot of sense, but are pets to high-ranking execs.

Pros: Pay is great, benefits are good.

Cons: Expectations are unrealistic, and out-of-country workers are hard to work with. HR is incompetent. Newcomers will be expected to climb the ladder, but reorgs will get in the way, as will people sticking to only doing things the old ways. You'll be asked to drive and come up with ideas, but having to deal with team projects will get in the way of actually accomplishing anything.

Pros: Great work-life balance. Great bosses. Great colleagues that you can rely on. Private or shared offices (team size/facilities permitting; expect a three-plus year wait or management for privacy in my experience). Good facilities. Pretty good equipment. Lots of cafeterias with varying kinds of food. Company name recognition and respect. Free sodas and juices.

Cons: A not-invented-here mentality. The company is split into fiefdoms that look out for themselves first. The CEO, Steve Ballmer, is a clown with no vision, inspiration, or appeal. No cool perks like at Google: no free food, no massages, no campus bicycles, no 20% time, etc. There's a stink of stagnation and irrelevance. You have to use Windows and Microsoft tools (no UNIX terminal or programs). Huge wastes of time: dependencies are often constructed in parallel, and the stuff you need just isn't there yet (contrast this to an iterative approach). Most tools are homegrown and not supported very well. No Git or other decentralized version control; it's like CVS or SVN, but a worse Microsoft version. Terrible Sharepoint wiki software used for internal wikis. Often times, some internal tool doesn't work, and you have no idea who to talk to.