8 ms·

This. I'm surprised how often people try to copy Google practices because Google can't be wrong. My bet is that Google is one of the worst places to learn anyt

by hbrn 4y ago

This. I'm surprised how often people try to copy Google practices because Google can't be wrong. My bet is that Google is one of the worst places to learn anything, be it product, management or programming. You will only learn how to solve problems the Google way, and that is only applicable at Google. It's like learning to govern from Xi Jinping. Sure, there probably are some interesting experiences to observe. But few will claim that let's say Norway will be better off implementing China's political system.

scarface74 4y ago
It’s easy to see from the outside that Google is incompetent when it comes to overall product and program management. Since this is a technical audience, I guess I should clarify that “program management” doesn’t refer to software development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Program_management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Program_management
- samstave 4y ago
  This. And when you refer to pm-Ing in this way I’m reminded of the guy in San Francisco that did all the management for a huge eve online guild and he didn’t play the game he managed all their affects in a spreadsheet and whatever they were using to chat…. And he was making a boatload of human money a month… I wonder where he is now…
- moandcompany 4y ago
  As a Xoogler, Google is an "engineering-first" company and in practice doesn't consider "product/program management" to be part of engineering. Ironically, the origin of formal methods used in program management come from operations research and engineering management -- they are part of engineering, but not seen that way at Google. Engineering leadership is not judged for their acumen in these areas, as they are separate job ladders, and thus to no surprise there is little cultivation of this knowledge or skill.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    The only BigTech company that I’ve worked for is Amazon and there are plenty of articles about how features and products get approved at Amazon. How does this even happen at any company that isn’t a conglomerate based on acquisitions? https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/21/22538240/google-chat-allo-hangouts-talk-messaging-mess-timeline https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/21/22538240/google-chat-allo...
  - donalhunt 4y ago
    Before ~ 2007, Google didn't believe in project managers. There were actually no project managers roles (even though some people were probably doing considerable amounts of project management) and the expectation was that engineers would know enough to structure efforts and timelines. That evolved into a situation where program managers (mostly - programs have a sense of scale right??) exist in most orgs and are critical to keep things aligned. There were (are still?) even internal conferences just for program managers.
huevosabio 4y ago
It's more like learning to government from Saudi Arabia or another gulf country. The money printing machine obliterates all economic feedback loops.
- samstave 4y ago
  And the fact that it seems literally nobody at google is even looking at said loops. But you know what is needed : is some whistleblower from within google to tell us how the decisions are made for shutting down services… And btw I don’t even know what stadia is!
  - hbrn 4y ago
    Looking at feedback loops means being honest with yourself and accepting you don't know everything. And for most people that's hard to admit. Surely if you got into Google you know almost everything. You just need a little bit of money to execute.
danielmarkbruce 4y ago
It's a good place to learn real engineering. They know how to build systems. There are some of the best engineering minds on the planet in there.
- lostcolony 4y ago
  Only if you very narrowly define real engineering. Google, collectively, may be among the best (I'm not hazarding an opinion) at solving technical problems. I, however, expect good engineers to help with product vision, understanding and addressing customer pain points, and amongst the senior engineers especially, be effective at communication and helping manage upwards to achieve those ends. Somewhere, Google engineers are dropping the ball there, or are so detached from those problems that their abilities in those skills are untested.
  - danielmarkbruce 4y ago
    Yeah, that's fair. I'm just trying to discern between building a distributed database system with 5 9's and writing a crud app I guess. I agree "real" isn't the right term for that difference, I don't know what is.
    - hbrn 4y ago
      Here's a counterintuitive piece of wisdom: building both is equally hard. Running marathon is way harder than running 100m. Most people are not even capable of doing marathons. But that doesn't mean that winning 100m is easier than winning a marathon. Might even be the opposite, because of harsh competition. When you're building products, your goal is not run. Your goal is to win.
      - danielmarkbruce 4y ago
        Nah, it's not. Consultants pump out CRUD apps with 4th rate engineers left and right. About 10 people on planet earth could have come up with Spanner. I'm just talking about engineering. I'm not talking about building products which get market acceptance, which is a lot more than engineering, and might be your point.
_cehz 4y ago
Google is a fucked up place in many ways. But our software engineering practices and infrastructure are second to none.
- saagarjha 4y ago
  Google claims its software engineering practices are second to none. Whether this is actually true is a complicated question.
- hbrn 4y ago
  I'm honestly curious how would you know that? Which metrics would you use to compare one infrastructure to another? Or one eng practice to another. For example I heard multiple times that in a lot of projects at Google shipping something can take months (and I'm not even talking about search/ads). Compared to let's say Github, that deploys multiple times a day.
  - saagarjha 4y ago
    Deploying multiple times a day doesn’t necessarily mean “slow to ship”. That’s just how fast your commits make it out. Actually shipping software is almost always not CI bottlenecked but slowed because of social problems.

by hbrn 4y ago

scarface74 4y ago

It’s easy to see from the outside that Google is incompetent when it comes to overall product and program management. Since this is a technical audience, I guess I should clarify that “program management” doesn’t refer to software development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Program_management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Program_management

samstave 4y ago
This. And when you refer to pm-Ing in this way I’m reminded of the guy in San Francisco that did all the management for a huge eve online guild and he didn’t play the game he managed all their affects in a spreadsheet and whatever they were using to chat…. And he was making a boatload of human money a month… I wonder where he is now…
moandcompany 4y ago
As a Xoogler, Google is an "engineering-first" company and in practice doesn't consider "product/program management" to be part of engineering. Ironically, the origin of formal methods used in program management come from operations research and engineering management -- they are part of engineering, but not seen that way at Google. Engineering leadership is not judged for their acumen in these areas, as they are separate job ladders, and thus to no surprise there is little cultivation of this knowledge or skill.
- scarface74 4y ago
  The only BigTech company that I’ve worked for is Amazon and there are plenty of articles about how features and products get approved at Amazon. How does this even happen at any company that isn’t a conglomerate based on acquisitions? https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/21/22538240/google-chat-allo-hangouts-talk-messaging-mess-timeline https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/21/22538240/google-chat-allo...
- donalhunt 4y ago
  Before ~ 2007, Google didn't believe in project managers. There were actually no project managers roles (even though some people were probably doing considerable amounts of project management) and the expectation was that engineers would know enough to structure efforts and timelines. That evolved into a situation where program managers (mostly - programs have a sense of scale right??) exist in most orgs and are critical to keep things aligned. There were (are still?) even internal conferences just for program managers.

huevosabio 4y ago

It's more like learning to government from Saudi Arabia or another gulf country. The money printing machine obliterates all economic feedback loops.

samstave 4y ago
And the fact that it seems literally nobody at google is even looking at said loops. But you know what is needed : is some whistleblower from within google to tell us how the decisions are made for shutting down services… And btw I don’t even know what stadia is!
- hbrn 4y ago
  Looking at feedback loops means being honest with yourself and accepting you don't know everything. And for most people that's hard to admit. Surely if you got into Google you know almost everything. You just need a little bit of money to execute.

danielmarkbruce 4y ago

It's a good place to learn real engineering. They know how to build systems. There are some of the best engineering minds on the planet in there.

lostcolony 4y ago
Only if you very narrowly define real engineering. Google, collectively, may be among the best (I'm not hazarding an opinion) at solving technical problems. I, however, expect good engineers to help with product vision, understanding and addressing customer pain points, and amongst the senior engineers especially, be effective at communication and helping manage upwards to achieve those ends. Somewhere, Google engineers are dropping the ball there, or are so detached from those problems that their abilities in those skills are untested.
- danielmarkbruce 4y ago
  Yeah, that's fair. I'm just trying to discern between building a distributed database system with 5 9's and writing a crud app I guess. I agree "real" isn't the right term for that difference, I don't know what is.
  - hbrn 4y ago
    Here's a counterintuitive piece of wisdom: building both is equally hard. Running marathon is way harder than running 100m. Most people are not even capable of doing marathons. But that doesn't mean that winning 100m is easier than winning a marathon. Might even be the opposite, because of harsh competition. When you're building products, your goal is not run. Your goal is to win.
    - danielmarkbruce 4y ago
      Nah, it's not. Consultants pump out CRUD apps with 4th rate engineers left and right. About 10 people on planet earth could have come up with Spanner. I'm just talking about engineering. I'm not talking about building products which get market acceptance, which is a lot more than engineering, and might be your point.

_cehz 4y ago

Google is a fucked up place in many ways. But our software engineering practices and infrastructure are second to none.

saagarjha 4y ago
Google claims its software engineering practices are second to none. Whether this is actually true is a complicated question.
hbrn 4y ago
I'm honestly curious how would you know that? Which metrics would you use to compare one infrastructure to another? Or one eng practice to another. For example I heard multiple times that in a lot of projects at Google shipping something can take months (and I'm not even talking about search/ads). Compared to let's say Github, that deploys multiple times a day.
- saagarjha 4y ago
  Deploying multiple times a day doesn’t necessarily mean “slow to ship”. That’s just how fast your commits make it out. Actually shipping software is almost always not CI bottlenecked but slowed because of social problems.