7 ms·
There are many large, stable, profitable companies that are hiring software engineers. They are not software houses, but they pay well for a comfortable life (o
by ptero 3y ago
There are many large, stable, profitable companies that are hiring software engineers. They are not software houses, but they pay well for a comfortable life (outside of NYC and Bay Area) and offer good work-life balance. For some examples you can look at medical devices, utilities, manufacturing, IBMs and Walmarts and R&D departments of virtually any large non-software company.
But there are frictions, too. Unless you go into management, comp tops out around $200k in most metros. HR -- instead of write-your-own-rules in a startup you have to take corporate training and get approval for things folks at the startups take for granted. Limited tools, externally managed corporate OS and software, Outlook instead of Slack. Office time requirements -- fully remote is very rare. And so on.
Not saying this is the wrong choice, just that there are tradeoffs.
- closeparen 3y agoAbsolutely. It’s weird though that tech focused companies with Silicon Valley style cultures who are looking to cut costs are completely uninterested in those regions. With more developer-friendly working conditions, they wouldn't have to compete as aggressively on TC. And with more normal cost of living, it could be sustainable for senior people who are not independently wealthy to have long tenures there.
- ptero 3y agoI think you are absolutely right that there appears to be some low hanging fruit for tech companies to pick by looking to "second tier metros". But I inertia and (lack of) critical mass play a big role. In the past decade (i.e., when the money was plentiful) when a startup is young, the TC of its engineers rarely makes or breaks the startup. Being able to get an MVP out and iterate quickly is more important, so it was a rational choice to stay in the Bay Area even if it means 30% inflated TC. And after that moving is expensive in both time and money and risky (e.g., a key engineer might not want to go). And having a critical mass of tech companies helps attract talent: if a company goes under or has large layoffs it is perceived to be easier to find a new job in the center of the tech hub. I think covid helped nudge along the process of moving tech development out of SV, but it is a slow process. My 2c.
- closeparen 3y agoTech is moving rapidly out of Silicon Valley... but strangely, straight to the developing world, skipping second-tier metros.
- sidlls 3y agoSome tech is. Meanwhile large tech companies that are actually innovating (FAANG, near-FAANG, and FAANG-adjacent companies) are not. My comp has never been higher, and we're hiring. In the bay area.
- alasdair_ 3y agoI’m honestly unable to name a single innovation from a FAANG that wasn’t just buying another company or cloning a competitor in the last five years. What has Meta or Google or Microsoft actually innovated on recently?
- bombcar 3y agoThe M1 is kinda innovative but Apple did “just buy companies”.
- fragmede 3y agoSelf-driving cars, from the Google self-driving car project, which was later renamed Waymo, kinda seems like a big deal to me.
- hasty_pudding 3y agoWill be interesting to see if they keep it going or shut it gown. Google has a way of starting something and then shutting it down.
- charcircuit 3y agoThese companies are always innovating. Google doesn't just say "Our ad recommendation system is good enough, lets just go into maintenence mode for a year." No. They constantly are trying to improve their models, switch to a better architecture, and innovate to try and eke out a few more percentage points of conversions.
- alasdair_ 3y agoI just looked at Walmart. Base pay was 240k remote plus a lot of bonuses and benefits. Even Walmart isn’t paying Walmart wages any more.
- democracy 3y agoFrankly I miss these annoying outlook calendar notifications, these days nothing comes close to be that invasive )