4 ms·
> many will find in 2-3 years that they have career opportunities at Google and companies of similar size but few opportunities at more interesting companies th
by curun1r 12y ago
> many will find in 2-3 years that they have career opportunities at Google and companies of similar size but few opportunities at more interesting companies that are looking for someone with a few years experience with newer technologies.
What technologies would those be? I'm scratching my head trying to think of the latest, cool stuff that people want to work with.
On the language front, among the hottest right now are NodeJS and Go. Some might argue older languages like Erlang or Haskell are pretty trendy or perhaps Rust, but none of those have the current momentum of the first two and Google is behind the runtime for NodeJS and created Go.
On the data front, Hadoop is pretty trendy right now, but that's based almost entirely off stuff that Google pioneered. Other NoSQL databases are pretty popular and, again, Google has its fingerprints all over that. Hell, a bunch of the NoSQL technologies even use LevelDB as a storage backend.
Distributed systems? You'll learn more about them at Google than anywhere else. They were first with solutions to distributed consensus and they'll likely be first with whatever new need develops simply because their scale will ensure that they hit problems before almost anyone else.
DevOps technologies like Docker? Well, beyond the fact that Docker is implemented in Go, Google has long used internal technology like Docker and have supported Docker by releasing projects like Kubernetes.
Perhaps you mean cool hardware technology like self-driving cars, wearable technology, gigabit home internet, balloon-based internet or stuff like Chromecast?
So perhaps you can share with us what technology that they'd be exposed to elsewhere that they can't find within Google?
- oscargrouch 12y agoTools != Technology.. The tools could be the same any "mortal" of us techies use, but the technology created using those tools can be something cool, creative and different. The problem is not in the "status quo" of the tools, but in what problems and in what way its aiming at something that can be amusing and exciting, like the Wonka's Chocolate Factory to the next generation of kids. You need to be cool to get the guys that will built the next gen of tech, and with time, tech companies loose their sex appeal, because they become a boring piramid, looking for profit; because after the IPO, you have a board of the same-old-same-old and have to deliver profits to the stock market. Its a like a couple, in the beginning everything is exciting and new, but with time, given they repeat the same things, the same routine, theres nothing new anymore, and the glow of the beggining just fade away Anyway, its the institutionalization effect, if you follow the same path, you will get the same results.. Its the law of impermanence, that anything grow old and dies someday
- defen 12y ago> Distributed systems? You'll learn more about them at Google than anywhere else. They were first with solutions to distributed consensus and they'll likely be first with whatever new need develops simply because their scale will ensure that they hit problems before almost anyone else. What percentage of Googler's actually built that (certainly impressive) system, vs just use it? If you go work at some other company, is that knowledge of how to use Google's tech going to be portable, or are they going to want someone with a couple years experience using Storm/Spark/whatever?
- aiiane 12y agoA distributed lock server is a distributed lock server. Yes, there are always going to be a few implementation quirks, but when it comes down to actually designing a scalable system, the implementation quirks are noise - it's knowing what general tools to use and how they interact with one another that is the key insight. That knowledge is portable.
- lclarkmichalek 12y ago> They were first with solutions to distributed consensus Lamport was a Googler? Well I never...
- curun1r 12y agoI probably should have added the "in production" qualifier. Academic papers will almost always precede production use, but Chubby was definitely one of, if not the, first solutions to handle a large-scale production workload. Also, it could be argued that previous solutions to distributed consensus are only partial solutions without the work that Google has done to ensure consistent time across the distributed cluster. Regardless, it's hard to argue the original point that Google is on the forefront of that kind of technology.