I don't fully agree with the article's point, and I certainly don't like the tone: to me, it sounds like a useless rant and it seems as if the poster is using s

I don't fully agree with the article's point, and I certainly don't like the tone: to me, it sounds like a useless rant and it seems as if the poster is using symptoms of a sloppy QA as proof of a lack of expertise of the Google engineers. These are two different things. Having "the world's best engineers" should mean that you are able to solve problems that no one else can. That your engineers recognize possibilities and see solutions where no one else can. I can actually argue that because they (supposedly) hire engineers with such great expertise, the QA department suffers. A common symptom of smart people is that they don't want to be bothered with dumb, repetitive tasks (read: testing, QA, etc) but rather want to solve interesting problems. Besides, it would be a bit weird to expect smart people to not make any mistakes. People always make mistakes, no matter how smart they are. If mistakes are noticeable to the end user, in the end it's due to an error in the business processes, not a human error.