
Why I went with them and not you: feedback to an interviewer - jobeirne
http://jamesob.nfshost.com/2011/04/01/them-vs-you.html
======
coffeemug
The degree of entitlement among new grads in the software development industry
is incredible. I know because I've been there. Now I see it from the other
side as an employer, and when I think of the way I acted after I graduated, I
want to go back and kick myself. In retrospect, this was a sign of immaturity
and self-aggrandizing.

I genuinely believed at the time that Emacs and Linux and Common Lisp somehow
made me special, when in reality I just wanted to convince myself that I was a
better developer than my peers. I wasn't. I was a good coder, but I was
immature, wasted a ton of people's time, and refused to listen to people who
wrote code that solved real problems while I was on my "let's switch to Linux
and Lisp" crusade.

I can point out a ton of examples where Windows is significantly better than
Linux and vice versa. Same goes for most programming languages, development
environments, and software methodologies. Saying "I like UNIX more and prefer
to develop in it" is one thing. Saying that a choice of the OS tells me
something about an organization and that _their_ particular system of choice
is somehow based on worse philosophical principles than my alternative is
naive and condescending beyond belief.

The rule of thumb is to understand before you decide you've understood. If we
used this principle more often, the industry overall would be a much more
nourishing environment to work in.

~~~
iamdave
_The rule of thumb is to understand before you decide you've understood._

Yeah, no.

The rule of thumb ought to be find your own path, go with what works for you
and forget everyone else's establishments. Clearly this guy saw a job with a
culture and environment that he got a good vibe from, he liked their approach,
he liked their people, he chose them.

On the flip side, I personally don't know where this attitude comes from that
the younger generations should have to toil and sweat and bleed before they
get that opportunity engage in something that clicks with them. Life is short,
but JUST long enough to get those experiences in whatever way they come along
in our lives.

Personally, I'm just as sick of old curmudgeons coming along dictating to
young people how they should run a career just because said old fogie had to
go in a different direction just to get _his_ in the world as you are with
recent grad students and their "entitlement".

~~~
barista
Not toil and sweat but as a fresh graduate do you really have enough
experience to make decision about culture? And that too based only on a couple
of interviewers?

Not working on windows because you don't agree with its design philosophies is
ridiculous. It's not that you are working on building windows. It's just a
platform. You select the tool that works best to get the job done. Not because
you agree with the tools philosophy.

If I got such a letter I'd actually retract offer to this candidate.
Flexibility and eagerness to take on challenges and learn goes a long way in
your initial days as a developer. Lacking these qualities is a big no-go for
me at least.

~~~
davidw
I've been working in this industry for a while, and I've never regretted my
decision to pretty much be a Linux-only guy. You can't do everything, and I
like working with tools that are pleasing to me. I felt that way when I
started working and I feel that way now.

Sure, I probably lose out on some jobs because I'm not a Windows guy, but I'm
also not an Oracle guy or a SAP guy or a Cobol guy or a Fortran guy either.
It's a big field, and there's lots of room. As of late, I've found that even
here in Italy there are plenty of Rails jobs, so, despite knowing it, I've
also made a decision to not be a "PHP guy" either.

So I don't think that sort of choice is merely lack of experience.

I think the only reason for worry is if someone decides they're an XYZ guy,
and that's all they do. I've used many languages professionally, and find
learning new ones fun. I have more time for that if I spend less screwing
around with things I don't like.

~~~
skorgu
Absolutely. When I interviewed for my current job one of the interviewers
walked in, looked at my resume and said "Wow a resume with no Windows on it.
Nice."

Not that I'm bashing the Microsoft stack mind you, it just doesn't interest
me. I'd do it to pay the bills if I had to but there's enough depth in the
industry that, as you say, I'm not terribly worried by not knowing
_everything_.

------
haberman
I think it is unwise to send a letter with this tone to someone you've turned
down. I say this as someone who used to do exactly the same thing. You think
you're being honest, but to be on the receiving side of this it comes off
badly.

Especially as a new grad, it's not really your place to lecture someone about
how Unix embodies the essence of good software engineering when they have
probably been doing this a lot longer than you and have their own ideas about
what good software design is.

You could have given the same feedback in a way that is much less likely to
come off badly by simply saying "I've really a UNIX kind of guy and a Windows
shop probably isn't the best fit for me."

~~~
Pahalial
I don't know that I agree: you're essentially advocating dishonesty, in my
opinion. If he legitimately feels that a Unix shop by nature will espouse
certain qualities, why should he hold back?

They solicited his feedback. Unless he wants to hold them in his pocket as a
fall-back, I can't see why he should sugarcoat his response. Yes, you could
call his opinion essentially hubris if you disagree and wanted to be
antagonistic, but it's at least honest, straightforward, and not unduly
confrontational.

I say this as someone who's been off-and-on involved with interviewing and
sent out this kind of question to people who turned us down - the only two
times I got a response, they were devoid of any information and just
platitudes to butter us up. Literally not a single negative point about us or
our process, which needless to say was not helpful and personally annoyed me
far more than a letter like this would have done.

~~~
haberman
What about "I'm really a UNIX kind of guy and a Windows shop probably isn't
the best fit for me" is dishonest or devoid of information?

This makes it clear that he prefers UNIX and that was a factor in declining
the position. It stops short of passing sweeping judgements on people who do
not prefer UNIX, which is very likely to annoy somebody who prefers Windows.

~~~
jobeirne
Which "sweeping judgements" did I pass on people who do not prefer Unix? All
I've said in this article is that, given the choice between Windows and Unix,
I prefer Unix. I went on to add points on why I like Unix, which admittedly is
a little extraneous, but I never voiced any negative judgement on Windows.
Many seem to infer that themselves.

~~~
delluminatus
Let's be honest, you were basically singing UNIX's praises for a little bit.
While I agree with them, you have to admit that saying that "Unix
encapsulates, and indeed was built on, many core principles of good software
design" is a sidelong criticism of Windows which you imply is not built upon
core principles of good software design. I imagine this could easily be
construed as an insult.

Consider if a Windows user said he didn't want to work at a Unix shop because
Windows is a better-designed operating system. Would you not consider this a
judgement of Unix?

~~~
jobeirne
Good points. I agree that it's reasonable to construe what I was saying as a
swipe at Windows.

What I really meant, and I guess I didn't do a sufficient job at getting this
across, was that I _know_ Unix is rock-solid; I don't _know_ the same about
Windows. Truth be told, I know very little about Windows since I haven't used
it for 4 years. I was going for a positive point about Unix, not a negative
one about Windows.

But you have a pretty good point about my praise of Unix being a vacuous swipe
at Windows.

~~~
gridspy
I only use Windows because I am always in too much of a rush to pass through
the pain of adopting a new operating system on my desktop machine. We do
deploy onto Linux.

I don't have any local Linux / Unix help.

Perhaps if you joined the team, many of the other developers would also have
switched. I might have if I was from this company.

------
j_baker
_It may seem arbitrary, but the platform an organization uses is indicative to
me of a whole lot._

Was anyone else a bit annoyed by this statement? It's a good, wholesome, and
healthy thing to say "You guys use Windows and I like using Unix", but it's
wrong to say "You guys use Windows, and that says something about your
organization."

Why do techies have such a tendency to phrase "I don't like _x_ " as "It is
_wrong_ to use x".

~~~
jdietrich
The majority of skilled developers prefer Macs or Linux. I've been at large
conferences and not seen a single Windows machine. Some developers like
Windows, that's fine, but just as many hate it. It's not wrong for a developer
to use Windows, but it is wrong for a company to impose it, or even to have it
as the default option.

For a company to say "at our company, we use Windows" is to say "We don't give
a shit about developers". The issue isn't Windows, the issue is a workplace
culture that places the preferences of management over the preferences of
developers. Life is too short to work for people who don't respect you,
especially when you've got one of the most valuable skills in the world.

~~~
ronnier
I like how my workplace does it. Everyone gets a linux desktop. You then get
the option of either a MAC or Windows 7 laptop, totally up to you.

~~~
ludwigvan
What's the percentage of those that choose mac? I would choose mac since it
can run Windows, too.

~~~
ronnier
It seems pretty even. At orientation you are given a new Windows PC. You then
have to trade it in for a MAC.

------
michaelpinto
You may vote me down but this reminds me a great deal of how things started to
feel right before the last dot.com crash circa 2001. I imagine most of you are
too young to recall it, but before we hit the end programmers were worth more
than gold. You'd get kids who didn't even finish this CS degree looking for
stock options, aeron chairs and other perks (...and do you have a sushi chef
on site?). And small companies gladly did this because even getting a warm
body was better than not.

And then it hit. First one company and then the next. Each week you'd read
about another 100 people being laid off. You knew that even if 1 in 10
razorfish employees were decent that 90 amazing people were now hitting the
streets. Our guilty pleasured was reading f*ckedcompany -- a website that just
covered the daily implosions.

I hope that history won't repeat itself on that scale, but that said this
point in time feels like that point in time. I see other signs too: For
example a German car company just opened up a VC fund. I know that Facebook
could be the next Google, yet I was recently shocked to see a content farm go
public. With any luck the rest of the economy will recover to buffer an
industry stumble, but you never know.

------
dmlorenzetti
I picked my first career essentially on the basis of interviewers.

My undergrad (at U.Cincinnati) required all engineering students to take a co-
operative education job for 6 months a year. You pick your first job after the
freshman year. At that stage in the game, I had no idea what I would find most
rewarding (I was in an electrical and computer science program, which left a
lot of room to choose).

Most companies sent engineers to the campus recruiting center. They tended to
ask dry questions about classes and training. The guy from RCA Semiconductor
was personable, warm, and knew how to sell his company. He also "got" that
frosh aren't really at the stage where grilling them on technical knowledge
makes much sense when deciding who to take a chance on, so he steered the
conversation more toward life experiences, interests, and working style.

I went with RCA, with no reservations. Happily for me, it turned out that Tom
reflected the company culture in the factory that sent him. Was it the "best"
decision? I can't say, but I do know that a truly professional interviewer had
a profound impact on the path I followed for many years of my professional
career.

------
elbelcho
I'd be interested to know if the author finds this article embarrassing in 10
years.

When I started in professional software development 10 years ago (about), I
probably would have made many similar points.

I see a lot of the same attitudes in CS students today. They are just
absolutely CERTAIN that the entire world can be easily categorized into their
predefined concepts.

As you get older and more experienced, you'll realize that a lot of your early
opinions were naive at best. I have a feeling the article's author will feel
similarly in the future.

~~~
jarin
I've been a developer for just over 10 years now, and I would say the opposite
for myself. 10 years ago, I would never have written a response like this.
Now, I would in a heartbeat.

I do think that he will find it embarrassing in 10 years, but for different
reasons (like in 10 years, Windows is a super awesome development platform, or
running on Amazon Web Services is like running on IIS, or jQuery is the new
VBScript, or something like that).

~~~
gaius
There is nothing about "the cloud" today that wasn't said about "the
mainframe" back in the day...

~~~
vparikh
Except for one big difference -- today, I or the company I work for, doesn't
have to own "the mainframe". Basically its a return to the "mainframe" with
the cost and exclusivity. That is a huge difference.

~~~
gaius
In the 70s you had "computer bureaus" that owned the mainframe that you would
rent time on by the hour. A lot of the early MUDs ran in spare capacity on
these. Exactly like the cloud...

------
jbarnette
I don't get the impression that many of the commenters here are spending a lot
of time trying to hire good people right now. I am, and I'd be grateful to
receive an email like this.

I wouldn't _like_ it, but honest, personal feedback on an interview process is
hard to find.

------
biotech
I see many comments pointing out that it may be a good technical decision to
develop on Windows. This is a good point; many skilled engineers target
Windows and .NET with great success. In that case, having a Windows
development environment makes sense.

However, it sounds like the organization in question was not deploying to
Windows - from the article:

 _...it seemed to me that most of your development happens on Windows (though
it’s almost needless to say that you deploy to Linux)_

I won't judge you for using Windows over Unix (even though I prefer Unix), but
I will judge the choice of using Windows for development when you are
targeting Unix. I have had this experience, and it was a Management decision -
_not_ an Engineering decision, and it resulted in significantly less
productive work environment. Given two opportunities that are otherwise equal,
I would definitely choose the company that develops on the same platform that
they deploy on (assuming we're talking about Unix or Windows - there are
obvious exceptions in the embedded world).

One caveat: It is common for an organization to use _both_ Windows and Linux
for different tasks. In that case, the choice of development environment is
more complicated.

Either way, I'd say that the candidate should have asked up front during the
interview, "Why are you using Windows for development, and could I use
Mac/Linux instead?", instead of judging them based on what seems like a lack
of information. They may have a good reason. If they don't, your decision is
that much easier.

~~~
asnyder
It would be nice to know what type of shop they were, after all in some places
your OS just provides a text editor or IDE where you work on files remotely
and run in a browser off of a *NIX server. If that was the case it doesn't
matter what OS they're developing in, as anyone should be able to develop in
the OS and text editor of their choice so long as it can hook up to SSH.

------
pdenya
A lot of good points that would definitely influence me in picking a company.
Especially developing on windows, I would personally list that heavily in the
cons column.

~~~
redthrowaway
It would be for me as well, but there are many people who swear by Visual
Studio, and Microsoft is generally very developer-friendly. I'm sure there's
reasons beyond corporate dictate that many companies choose to develop in
Windows.

~~~
jrockway
I've used Visual Studio at work.

The first C++ program I wrote caused the compiler to segfault. It was hello
world compiled as managed code using the .net string class. The solution was
to wait for the next version of Visual Studio to be approved by the Internal
Software Approval Team.

I switched to Haskell + Emacs and never looked back. If you're stuck on
Windows, that's a damn good development environment. Miles ahead of anything
Microsoft could offer. (But visual studio lets you refactor shit by right
clicking. Yeah, but Haskell lets me write code that actually works.)

~~~
apl

      > I switched to Haskell + Emacs and never looked back. 
      > If you're stuck on Windows, that's a damn good 
      > development environment. Miles ahead of anything 
      > Microsoft could offer.
    

<http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/simonpj/>

Yeah, Microsoft has no _clue_ what they're doing, man.

~~~
skorgu
Microsoft undoubtedly has a lot of smart people and a lot of fascinating
research. They also have a serious problem turning that research expertise
into shipped product.

~~~
apl
Sure, and they have that problem across the board. The Courier concept art is
a fairly recent example.

But a comment praising Haskell as an experience that Microsoft can't rival
while 85% of the Haskell team are on Microsoft's payroll? Too tempting.

------
arethuza
I honestly don't see what the problem is with what chap wrote - it's more than
20 years since I graduated and I felt pretty much as he does about Unix, and
to a certain extent I still do (even though I don't have any problem using
Windows).

I've hired a lot of people over the years, for my own company and for others,
and if someone wrote this to me I'd thank them for their feedback and wish
them the best luck with their career.

------
pnathan
I believe that things can only be improved with honesty and transparency. I
would rather work with someone who gave real feedback than give a mealy-
mouthed reply.

The OP is very straightforward and - to me - non-insulting. It might be a bit
of a bitter pill to swallow, but when one asks for feedback, one should be
grateful when it is given...

my 2c.

------
Lost_BiomedE
Interesting. It has been quite a while since i have done an interview for an
office job, but I will start doing so soon. I worked in the restaurant
industry as my last non-entrepreneurial career.

Seeing the developing on Windows and deploying on Linux as a big flag sounds
analogous to noticing a dirty walk-in fridge, burnt-out light in the dining
area, or a deer in the headlights look and lack of smiles in a busy line-cook.

Is it common for the interviewee to ask as many questions about the employer
as the employer asks of the interviewee? In most business dealings or past job
interviews, I have taken it as a red flag if this was not the case.

Were you able to ask why they used Windows or was it expected that you were to
just answer their questions?

------
mruniverse
What a little snot. He likes Unix because that's what he knows and he's not
comfortable developing in Windows.

I know a lot of middling developers (I include myself in that group) that are
like this. The really good devs I know don't care much about the OS. They're
more interested in the problems to be solved.

------
d4nt
What I hear when reading this is "I feel a greater sense of belonging with
Compant Y". Everything else could be just rationalisation after the fact,
people are _amazingly_ good at rationalising why they believe the same thing
as their friends.

------
gyepi
Great points. As someone hiring for a "company Y", I firmly believe in the
design process and culture and try hard to make candidates feel that they
would play meaningful technical and cultural roles in the company.

------
zafka
I agree with the sentiment of your letter, I feel that it might not have been
the most diplomatic thing to say, but there is a pretty good chance you won't
have to worry about it. Keep improving your skills so you can voice opinions
with out worry that it will kill your career.

------
jrussbowman
My experience has me at the point where I won't go into detail explaining why
I don't take s position. I tried when I turned down a government contractor
for a position maintaining a couple servers for a position where I would be
responsible for a few hundred for a lot less. They just pushed the money and
got offended not understanding I needed the challenge and learning
experiences. I left the situation feeling a little guilty and then just
figured out you need to do what's right for you and not get into explaining it
to people who won't even remember you in a few months.

------
grammr
Considering how strongly the author feels about developing exclusively on
*nix, I found it surprising that it took as much as an interview for him to
learn that "company X" uses Windows. Almost all software job reqs. offer
reasonable insight as to what key technologies they use.

Other than that, I found his response reeking of condescension and
inexperience.

~~~
dhume
_I found it surprising that it took as much as an interview for him to learn
that "company X" uses Windows._

I didn't catch anything in the post saying he didn't find that out until the
interview.

~~~
kenjackson
Then why did he interview? If it was a phone interview... sure, no biggy. But
an onsite interview requires some DD by the applicant. You don't even accept
the interview if there's no chance you'd work there. And if you do it anyways,
maybe for practice, then you don't give this type of feedback.

It's like going out on a date with a girl you're not attracted to just for
practice. And then when she asks why you didn't go on a second date saying,
"Because you're frankly not very attractive." You were kind of a jerk for
going on the date in the first place, but the feedback made you a certified
one.

In any case either the candidate doesn't do the type of reasonable DD that I'd
expect from an applicant, even a college hire. Or he's bordernline unethical.

~~~
dhume
_You don't even accept the interview if there's no chance you'd work there._

You don't know that there's no chance of working there until you know what
your other options are. If you're still interviewing (i.e. you don't have
offers/rejections in hand yet), you don't know what options you have. You
might know that you won't accept Company X's offer if Company Y also makes you
an offer, but that's quite a different situation from knowing there's no way
you'd accept Company X's offer.

------
ideamonk
I got in a similar situation, I interviewed for company X & company Y. I
fulfill all the requirements of company X's jobs page. But when it came to the
interview, they threw 4 well known questions after a short introduction which
sounded more like a pointless formality unlike a real conversation I get when
I meet devs at confs.

That night I was interviewed by an employee of Y, and he did spend first 20
minutes asking me questions on two of my side projects, grilling down to
details, catching up on new trends. And then there were questions to test my
cs skills, and an invite to face-to-face.

Overall I loved the way interviewer from Y dealt with me. I definitely could
connect more to the person from Y than from X.

------
pz
i'd be interested to see him revisit this letter after he's had the chance to
sit on the other side of the table in an interview.

------
cnunciato
Of course tools and technology definitely matter, and do influence culture,
which also matters, but if someone sent me a letter like this one I'd be
genuinely relieved it didn't work out.

------
Luyt
The asymmetry of the situation strikes me. Where a company which decides not
to hire someone can only say "we're not following through with your
application at this moment" out of fear of litigation, the candidate can
freely comment on his decision to not take the job.

It would be nice when companies were able to do the same.

~~~
v21
I live in the UK, and have gotten good feedback from jobs I didn't get. Even
though they were rejections, I often agreed with their points and choices. I
liked the companies more as a result. If I had solicited, and then received
this email, I would be very grateful - this kind of opinion must be very
difficult to find.

------
lwhi
Bravo on scoring two jobs, but a little bit boastful all the same. What a show
off :P

~~~
InfinityX0
In the developer job market, I think this is OK - because they are in such
high demand. If this compared jobs as entry-level marketing associates, I
would've felt more dissonance towards what you mention - but in this
situation, I think it was OK and not too ego-driven.

~~~
lwhi
Why would an applicant care whether other employers score good developers over
sating their own desire for an ego boost?

I don't buy it.

~~~
mkelly
Hiring qualified people is hard. Just because you're the applicant today
doesn't mean you won't be an interviewer tomorrow. It's better for all of us
if there's more communication about these things.

~~~
lwhi
I'm a cynic, but maybe yr right.

