

Which Is the Top Tech Company to Work For? - dabent
http://gigaom.com/2009/12/15/which-top-tech-company-to-work-for-not-google/

======
dejv
These lists are useless. There is no metric on how they pick these companies,
plus I think that most of us working in worst companies than those listed on
Lowest-Rated tech companies.

~~~
ARobotics
The results are in line with other studies though. National Instruments,
Google, and Apple all rank in the Fortune 100 best places to work every year.
It's not surprising that they top this list as well.

------
akamaka
Wow, NVIDIA is on the same list as Infosys, Nortel, and Perot Systems?

I find it hard to imagine that a company with such a great developer relations
department (and a pretty strong stock price) would be so horrible to work at.
I never heard any major complaints from my friends at post-merger ATI, and
they were in a much tougher situation.

------
rmason
If you take a look at the top ten worst list Perot Systems was ninth and Dell
was at the bottom.

Seeing as how Dell was acquiring Perot a wag suggested that it was a good
culture fit between the company's ;<)

------
schemer
Juniper ? I looked at the reviews for Cisco. I guess that's why people are
leaving for Juniper.

------
alaskamiller
I covered another Glassdoor's list a few weeks back. Their methodology is
based on averaging anonymous user-submitted reviews and scores. It's as
scientific as zoning a district through Yelp.

------
pwnstigator
For any company larger than 20 people, it matters more what group you are in
than what company you enter. I've met miserable and extremely happy people
from/at Google. If you end up as Peter Norvig's protege, I imagine it's pretty
awesome. If you end up in the wrong group and you're not able to move, it
probably sucks.

If you're under 35, stock performance and pay are not nearly as relevant as
what you'll learn and the quality of people you'll work with, unless you hit
an economic home run (e.g. enter the next Google on the ground floor).

