4 ms·

They're writing code obviously, but they are happy hiring mediocre programmers these days for their boring, mediocre products. They pay far lower than Google, F

They're writing code obviously, but they are happy hiring mediocre programmers these days for their boring, mediocre products. They pay far lower than Google, Facebook and Amazon do. They make zero effort to recruit the brightest minds in the industry.

mistermann 7y ago
Even if these things are true (and you have no way of knowing they are, you're clearly just guessing), your original assertion "Sorry, but this so called Microsoft revival under Nadella is pure marketing, not in the least bit technical" is false.
- vikinghckr 7y ago
  How does that follow? If what I say is true (and it is, just talk to software engineers who work at these big companies they'll tell you the same), then it means Microsoft have done nothing under Nadella that's ambitious or challenging from a technical point of view. They have made no new products or improved existing ones that warrants calling it a revival. All they have done is better PR.
  - mistermann 7y ago
    "They make zero effort to recruit the brightest minds in the industry." is true? Could you explain in detail how you know this to be true?
    - vikinghckr 7y ago
      Sure. Making an effort to recruit the brightest minds means first of all paying them like your competitors are paying. Giving them similar perks. Giving them challenging things to work on. Giving them good promotion paths within the company. Making the company engineering-driven rather than middle-manager driven. Google and Facebook do all of them. Microsoft currently do none. Also, you haven't addressed why you think even if my assertion is true how Microsoft's so called revival having nothing to do with tech isn't true.
      - mistermann 7y ago
        > Making an effort to recruit the brightest minds means first of all paying them like your competitors are paying. Giving them similar perks. Are compensation and perks the only factor in attracting talent? Are they a prerequisite? Are you able to substantiate this belief with facts? > Giving them challenging things to work on. Can you substantiate your claim that no one at Microsoft has interesting things to work on lately? Can you at least link to some anecdotal stories with a bit of substance to them? > Giving them good promotion paths within the company. Making the company engineering-driven rather than middle-manager driven. Google and Facebook do all of them. Microsoft currently do none. Again, do you have any evidence other than your opinion? > Also, you haven't addressed why you think even if my assertion is true how Microsoft's so called revival having nothing to do with tech isn't true. Azure. Their revenue increasingly comes from Azure. It is new. It is technology.

mistermann 7y ago

Even if these things are true (and you have no way of knowing they are, you're clearly just guessing), your original assertion "Sorry, but this so called Microsoft revival under Nadella is pure marketing, not in the least bit technical" is false.

vikinghckr 7y ago
How does that follow? If what I say is true (and it is, just talk to software engineers who work at these big companies they'll tell you the same), then it means Microsoft have done nothing under Nadella that's ambitious or challenging from a technical point of view. They have made no new products or improved existing ones that warrants calling it a revival. All they have done is better PR.
- mistermann 7y ago
  "They make zero effort to recruit the brightest minds in the industry." is true? Could you explain in detail how you know this to be true?
  - vikinghckr 7y ago
    Sure. Making an effort to recruit the brightest minds means first of all paying them like your competitors are paying. Giving them similar perks. Giving them challenging things to work on. Giving them good promotion paths within the company. Making the company engineering-driven rather than middle-manager driven. Google and Facebook do all of them. Microsoft currently do none. Also, you haven't addressed why you think even if my assertion is true how Microsoft's so called revival having nothing to do with tech isn't true.
    - mistermann 7y ago
      > Making an effort to recruit the brightest minds means first of all paying them like your competitors are paying. Giving them similar perks. Are compensation and perks the only factor in attracting talent? Are they a prerequisite? Are you able to substantiate this belief with facts? > Giving them challenging things to work on. Can you substantiate your claim that no one at Microsoft has interesting things to work on lately? Can you at least link to some anecdotal stories with a bit of substance to them? > Giving them good promotion paths within the company. Making the company engineering-driven rather than middle-manager driven. Google and Facebook do all of them. Microsoft currently do none. Again, do you have any evidence other than your opinion? > Also, you haven't addressed why you think even if my assertion is true how Microsoft's so called revival having nothing to do with tech isn't true. Azure. Their revenue increasingly comes from Azure. It is new. It is technology.