Microsoft

High bar for hiring, so the quality of engineering I worked with was excellent.

Good benefits, especially health and generous matching for charitable giving/volunteer time. If you have a family, can't do much better than this anywhere.

Moving internally is easy, so it's possible to work on varied products (from the OS to databases to online services to phones), which can be exciting for an engineer.

• Review models are good in theory, but broken in practice. Too much politicking may lead to surprises at review time.

• Mediocre middle management. Good engineers do not necessarily make good managers, and there is little coaching or mentoring on a lot of teams.

• The salary is good for the Pacific NW, but rewards for performance are mediocre at best. Being a star performer is not worthwhile, as the extra reward in cash or stock isn't that much more than what an average performer makes. While the management claims that the top 20% get good rewards, you really have to be in the top 5% for the extra effort to pay off.

• The company has too many me-too products and misses the boat too often on new ideas. This is frustrating as an employee and shareholder to see.

• Fix the review system. The 20/70/10 model of evaluating potential is too subjective and frustrating across the board.

• Reward innovation and encourage more skunkworks-type projects for risky products/services. Being an also-ran in product after product is bad for company morale and stock.

• Purge top management of also-rans and bring in fresh blood. "The Microsoft way" of doing things is obviously failing.