The company is an exciting place to work because there isn't a soul in the world whose life their products haven't touched.
Even a simple security fix goes out to hundreds of millions in the first weekend after release. The impact can be very satisfying.
Also, there are some very smart engineers who work there, and while working there, you get smarter by forming symbiotic work relationships.
Great place to learn many new tricks.
Pay and benefits are also very good.
Work hours get crazy only during deadlines but otherwise not too bad if you manage your working hours well.
Minus the office politics, this place would be great for work, but I guess a company of this size will always have some of that.
People with many agendas (sometimes conflicting).
The internal review system has become rigid and has created a culture of busy work just for the sake of justifying bonuses. This busy work has very low real impact on product quality, especially in test. The metrics they use change frequently and show a certain confusion or unsureness of middle management during reviews. Risk-taking has almost come to a stop. Any risks you see from the outside that the company is taking are for the sake of survival in certain markets and not because Microsoft has a culture of risky innovation. The top and middle management have become extremely risk-averse and tentative in their messaging to juniors. This can be de-motivating for extremely talented individuals, of which I saw many during my time. I also saw some above-average attrition in my product group. Apart from reviews, the company leadership has only worsened this behavior by setting similar examples. Some very confusing strategies in products and branding have brought the company where it is today.
Be judicious in what you reward and what you punish, and by how much. Learn to take calculated risks and identify new areas before the competition does.
(search/smartphone/portable media player/tablet/social) You had the technology to be a leader in all of the above areas, and you let it slip. All is not lost yet.
Lots of brain puzzles and escalating interviews with different people on the team. Read the books on brain puzzles asked at MS interviews. They're not wrong. Most people interview with multiple teams. However, if all your interviews are with one te
The interview process was good. The interview was mainly based on coding. There were no specific testing questions. The interview covered: * A question on arrays. * A question on Linked Lists, specifically how to insert a node. * A question o
Initially, I was contacted by a recruiter. I had a quick phone screening and then was called for an onsite interview. The onsite interview was horrible because one of the interviewers was jumping randomly between questions. I believe the interviewer
Lots of brain puzzles and escalating interviews with different people on the team. Read the books on brain puzzles asked at MS interviews. They're not wrong. Most people interview with multiple teams. However, if all your interviews are with one te
The interview process was good. The interview was mainly based on coding. There were no specific testing questions. The interview covered: * A question on arrays. * A question on Linked Lists, specifically how to insert a node. * A question o
Initially, I was contacted by a recruiter. I had a quick phone screening and then was called for an onsite interview. The onsite interview was horrible because one of the interviewers was jumping randomly between questions. I believe the interviewer