Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Businesses

Microsoft's Personnel Puzzle 961

theodp writes "CNET reports on Microsoft's reputation for arrogance in its personnel practices, citing the experience of Arthur Sorkin, who responded to an unsolicited invitation to interview with MS back in 2000. But instead of trying to sell him on the company or the job, interviewers challenged him with a technical 'pop quiz.' Sorkin, who holds a PhD in CS, withdrew his application. During the past year, Microsoft called Sorkin to say it had scheduled a phone interview with him for another job, although Sorkin hadn't applied for it and no one had asked if he was interested."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft's Personnel Puzzle

Comments Filter:
  • by hesiod ( 111176 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @04:57PM (#13007691)
    ...but, isn't it arrogant of him to think himself above any kind of proficiency test? Does he think he's perfect and should be hired with no showing of his actual ability?
  • by snorklewacker ( 836663 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:00PM (#13007731)
    ..but, isn't it arrogant of him to think himself above any kind of proficiency test? Does he think he's perfect and should be hired with no showing of his actual ability?

    He has a record that speaks for itself. He jumped through enough hoops to get the PhD, and he erroneously believed they recognized his established experience, given that they contacted him.

    So yes, he is above stupid mind games.
  • by Otto ( 17870 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:01PM (#13007751) Homepage Journal
    If somebody is sending you an unsolicited invitation for a job, then yes, you are above a profiency test. They invited you. Their goal should be to get you to take the job they are offering you.

    There's a difference between you asking them for a job and them asking you if you want a job.
  • by shawn(at)fsu ( 447153 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:02PM (#13007756) Homepage
    I agree.

    Our company does this, other companies I've interviewed do this. You can't blame them, it's not like every one is completely honest with there resume. It didn't phase me a bit when I was quized at my last interview.
  • Hmm... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Szaman2 ( 716894 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:02PM (#13007757) Homepage

    Well... I guess the fact that they quizzed him does not supprise me. I mean, any company of that size and public exposure will want to ensure high standards by screening even the most promissing and highly reffered applicants. The fact that they contacted him, does not mean they should not run him through this screening.

    What is sucky about this is the fact that they scheduled him for an interview after he withdrew the application. That seems kindoff fishy, and I would not want a prospective employer retain and reuse my info this way after I told them to suck it.

  • by mveloso ( 325617 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:03PM (#13007769)
    This should be Bad News for Microsoft, because in the end, any software product is first and foremost a reflection of what's in the mind of the developer. If you're hiring 2nd tier minds, you get 2nd tier software.

    Even if a product is so big that one person can't understand it, you can still understand what you're working on.

    This remind me of the "Joel on Software" article about python. Better software developers stay up-to-date because they want to. Lesser software develoeprs stay up-to-date because they have to.

    Why would working at Microsoft be interesting, unless you're political?
  • What, you think because you have a PhD, your feces doesn't stink? Guess what -- it does.

    When I worked for a particular company, we instituted a "programmer intelligence test". It didn't test nonsense like "Define Polymorphism", it had questions where they actually had to think like a programmer. I found that the more educated the person, the worse they did on the test! I had a number of PhD's get all affronted when faced when having to soil their precious fingers with actually proving they could think, rather than regurgitate the stuff they learned in college. My theory is that the really good programmers tended to want to get out into the world and learn practical knowledge, while the less proficient ones continued on to get "educated".

    (Example question, since I know you're curious: You have triple redundant storage of certain critical data. Write a subroutine that takes three 32 bit integers and produces a result where each bit is "voted on" by the corresponding bit in the three inputs. This question is designed to see if someone can think in terms of bits. One fool actually wrote, "First convert input to binary")

  • by lazlo ( 15906 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:06PM (#13007797) Homepage
    I had a friend who had a perfect quote for this sort of thing. "The left hand doesn't know which foot the right is shooting." It's an IPC failure. A "recruitment process" is designed to find good people. These are then handed off to a "hiring process", which begins with an "interview process". Unfortunately, the "interview process" recieves input from both recruitment *and* people walking in off the street. It's geared for weeding out the in-off-the-street group until all that's left is good people. That process doesn't know to act differently when fed a diet of people who are already known to be qualified, but aren't as desparate for a job as the street crowd.

    It looks funny from the outside, because even though we know better, it's easy to think of any large organization (i.e., Microsoft) as a single entity, when it's actually a group of individuals flying in loose formation, each doing what they percieve to be their job. Sometimes two people's jobs in such an organization will run to cross-purposes.
  • by jfengel ( 409917 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:08PM (#13007833) Homepage Journal
    I'd feel better about it if I trusted the proficiency test.

    Tests are a very rough measure of your skill. They're used to broadly separate candidates into maybe-acceptable and useless. You wouldn't make your decision based on it. You have to interview the person, and you can tell better from that than from the test whether he's any good or not. The tests are good only to weed out the obviously unacceptable candidates before you schedule an interview.

    I've taken some of these, and sometimes they're an insult; they ask about easily-looked-up trivia. And there's a difference between solving problems and answering riddles. I don't much care for tests that are nominally testing my "lateral thinking", because I hate the idea of losing a job because I didn't get the joke.

    Without seeing what this test looked like I can't support or condemn the guy. But let's just say that for some tests, yeah, I'd consider myself above it. Especially if I was invited.
  • by mrm677 ( 456727 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:10PM (#13007843)
    Thats right. A PhD in CS does not make a great programmer. A PhD trains and qualifies you to carry out research. A PhD creates knowledge instead of regurgitating it.

  • by C3ntaur ( 642283 ) <centaur&netmagic,net> on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:10PM (#13007847) Journal
    No, it's not arrogant at all, considering he did not solicit the interview. If a company said to me out of the blue, "We're really impressed with your skill set and would like to speak with you about a job opportunity", then ambushed me with a pop quiz when I got there, you can bet I'd be offended.

    With an opener like that, my expectation would be that they already had a good handle on my skill set through a referral, my published work, or some other means. Here's a dating analogy: You see an attractive woman at a bar, and offer to buy her a drink, complementing her good looks. Then you ask if she has any photos of her relatives, because you want to be sure that if you eventually breed, your offspring won't be ugly. Wouldn't you expect a slap in the face?
  • by servognome ( 738846 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:14PM (#13007895)
    He has a record that speaks for itself. He jumped through enough hoops to get the PhD, and he erroneously believed they recognized his established experience, given that they contacted him.

    And how many times have /.'ers complained about somebody who had great credentials but didn't actually know anything. There are some PhD's earned their degree by being handheld by a professor and just following what he says. They may know what they researched well, but the insight needed to expand just isn't there.

    Further, some of these technical interviews are there to identify if a person has the skills for a specific job. Somebody can have a PhD in chemical engineering and published articles on polymers, so would sound like a wonderful candidate. However, they may not fit into the specific job because they focused on polymer reaction simulation, and not on high temp polymer behavior, or understand the mechanical properties.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:14PM (#13007902)
    Yeah but PHDs don't code all day, so you are comparing apples and oranges. Why the hell would anyone get a PHD to be a code monkey? Chances are, MS wants PHDs to invent better algorithms.
  • Doh! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ridgelift ( 228977 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:17PM (#13007933)
    Its executives have acknowledged the recruiting headaches in recent months. For instance, Microsoft's Windows chief, Jim Allchin, conceded that Google had lured away some of the software giant's talent and said Microsoft's magnetic pull among college students may have weakened, according to a Seattle Times story late last year.
    Gee, ya think?! After years of beating up on students by branding many as pirates and communists for cutting their teeth on affordable Open Source software, Microsoft is shocked that somehow their abuses of the past have somehow come to bite them in their big, bloated behind.

    You watch. They're going to start handing out tonnes of free development software to get people re-interested in developing for Windows. With web apps all the rage, who needs 95% of the market with desktop apps when you can develop with PHP, Rails or other open source tools and get 100% of the market with web apps?
  • by sconeu ( 64226 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:19PM (#13007962) Homepage Journal
    I'm sorry, but why should M$ or any company have to sell the job to a prospective candidate?

    Because they cold-called him and invited him for an interview. Implication: "We know you're qualified, and we really want you to work for us."
  • by coyote-san ( 38515 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:19PM (#13007965)
    That's not a programmer question. Unless the position requires extremely heavy bit manipulation and you don't have a bible of solutions (in which case you're the one who should be interviewing), the answer is "Google the answer."

    I would ask something like handing them a bubble sort with a simple error in it, like boundary checking. If they catch that error, they're qualified to be a junior programmer.

    If they ask why I'm using my own bubble sort instead of calling the standard qsort() routine, they're senior developer/analyst material.
  • by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:20PM (#13007971)


    > What, you think because you have a PhD, your feces doesn't stink? Guess what -- it does.

    > When I worked for a particular company, we instituted a "programmer intelligence test". It didn't test nonsense like "Define Polymorphism", it had questions where they actually had to think like a programmer. I found that the more educated the person, the worse they did on the test!

    I don't suppose it occurred to you that there's more to CS than programming.

    Did you give these educated people a chance to ask you some questions that require thinking like a PhD?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:22PM (#13007997)
    these pop quizzes are all fine and dandy when applied to the masses of programmer-wannabees out there, but there comes a point in a person's career when he/she has so much experience that it is nigh on insulting to be questioned in this way. When you go to the doctor for a checkup, do you start quizzing them on their knowledge of this and that? At some point as an interviewer you've got to apply common sense and say 'ok this guy is highly experienced, highly qualified and yes i'm going to take his word for it'. Most often in these cases, the interviewer is a jumped up little runt that is just screwing with you.. because he can...
    that certainly was my experience at microsoft...

    all this BS about 'it's important to find out *how* you think' ... look - computer science isn't hard - don't kid yourselves - i wouldn't even call it a science .. the fact that the applicant is smart enough to have attended college is plenty enough - lol
  • by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:26PM (#13008032)


    > Thats right. A PhD in CS does not make a great programmer. A PhD trains and qualifies you to carry out research. A PhD creates knowledge instead of regurgitating it.

    And only an idiot would hire a PhD for a programming job. That's like hiring an M.D. to run urine tests, or an aerospace engineer to handle luggage at an airport.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:28PM (#13008058)
    Or, if the filesystem is in use:
    mount --move /mnt/fuji /mnt/redmond
    (requires 2.5.1 kernel or newer)
  • by einhverfr ( 238914 ) <chris@travers.gmail@com> on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:33PM (#13008099) Homepage Journal
    Having worked at Microsoft..... I am usually one of the first people to correct unreasonable attacks on them here at Slashdot.

    However.... Microsoft IMO has a big problem. On one hand they keep saying that they want "out of the box thinkers" and on the other hand, they want a fair degree of conformity regarding playing politic, etc. So these pop quizes (which are often anything but technical) are just a way to pretend to satisfy the first demand while really satisfying the former.

    Out of all the interviews I had, I only had one that was technically worth *anything.* In no other case did I feel like I could really have an intelligent technical conversation with the interviewer. So yes, I think that their interview skills need some work.
  • by pg110404 ( 836120 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:36PM (#13008127)
    (Example question, since I know you're curious:)

    I'm curious about the answer....

    In my world, triple redundant implies at least 4 copies and you have three 32 bit integers. Also, what is meant by "voted on"? Is there some kind of AI routine that says to itself "which bit from these three integers do I like best? Which one had the most effective election campaign?"

    Triple redundancy of critical data implies ensuring it can be recovered. What happens during the writing process where individual copies are not properly written (e.g. a corrupted raid)? I'd entertain the idea of going with blocking the data into fixed size 2 dimensional arrays and performing checksums on each axis. In the event of a disk failure, the data can be reasonably rebuilt by isolating the specific byte or bytes in that array that fails the checksum verification and applying a reverse checksum algorithm to determine the most likely original byte value.

    Before I'd answer that question, I'd try to find out the purpose behind that subroutine.
  • by number6x ( 626555 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:37PM (#13008139)

    Actually Microsoft is testing how quickly you can come up with a solution to a problem they have presented you with.

    Judging by their products, this should be a valuable skill at Microsoft.

    If you were looking for a job that required long term dedication to complete a goal and the ability to coordinate many tasks at the same time in order to achieve something coherent and complete, then you would consider the ability to achieve a Phd. in Computer Science, along with the track record of the candidate.

    No, Microsoft doesn't operate that way. Sell a faulty product to the customer, get a list of problems back, dole out the list to employees, put the fixes in patches, lather, rinse, repeat.

    Microsoft is trying to recruit the people who come up with a quick fix, not the people who think long term. Their recruiting techniques seem to be in line with their development techniques.

    If you want long term thinking, go work for IBM's mainframe division.

  • by HermanAB ( 661181 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:41PM (#13008175)
    Every organization worth its salt has a separate application process for 'experienced professionals'. The only company I know that actually has that on its web site, is Lockheed-Martin. In other organizations, experienced professionals are expected to figure out how to bypass HR and get hired directly by a higher level manager. I think 'bypassing HR' is actually part of the test for a professional...
  • by duffbeer703 ( 177751 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @05:54PM (#13008306)
    This particular PhD builds Air Force and financial simulations, and wrote significant portions of Solaris kernel code for Veritas VxVM.

    If you were interviewing Codd for a database gig, would you grill him on manhole covers & mysql syntax?
  • by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:05PM (#13008406) Journal
    Because they want the candidate.

    A company should try to sell itself to anyone they see as worth interviewing. The employee usually has the option to reject a job. Either they are already employed or they will have other offers.

    If the candidate turns them down, they've lost that person possibly for good, which means they're missing out on the money they would have made from him.
  • by birge ( 866103 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:08PM (#13008433) Homepage
    How many places do theoretical computer science research (i.e. real research, not just extremely novel programming)? I can't think of too many. Computer science research is essentially pure math research, and there's not much of that happening in industry, either. Believe it or not, you just can't make much money in isomorphic polytopes. (No, I have no idea what I just said.)
  • by Fulcrum of Evil ( 560260 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:11PM (#13008476)

    And how many times have /.'ers complained about somebody who had great credentials but didn't actually know anything. There are some PhD's earned their degree by being handheld by a professor and just following what he says. They may know what they researched well, but the insight needed to expand just isn't there.

    So talk to the guy and find out how he thinks - once you're an established expert in the field, you are above stupid proficiency tests.

  • by Suicyco ( 88284 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:16PM (#13008540) Homepage
    Dude. You always fill out an application for a job, EVEN if invited for it. Its HR paperwork. He withdrew his "application" from the HR process after he decided he didn't want the offered job. He didn't send them a resume hoping for a job.

    Have you never actually had a job before? I've had jobs handed to me, and then had to go through the whole process of being "interviewed", background check, tons of paperwork, etc. Large corporations have to show they hired fairly, hence even when a job is specifically for you, you still have to be chosen acceptable for the job by the HR folks.

  • by AuMatar ( 183847 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:18PM (#13008563)
    Because the job market isn't tight. I recently got voluntary severance. I'd say 1/3 of the companies I applied to wanted to interview me, and I got cold contacted based on my resume several times. I found a job paying 15% more in under a month of searching. Unless you're coming straight out of college, or believe that HTML is programming, the job market is currently very good.

    Even if it was poor, the company would need to sell itself to me. Thats what the interview process is for- for both sides to sell themselves. I need to convince the other company that they want me. They need to convince me that I will enjoy working there. If we don't both convince the other, we each try again.
  • by bADlOGIN ( 133391 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:26PM (#13008653) Homepage
    Q: "How would you move mount Fuji"?

    A: "First, I'd question the business case for moving mount Fuji."

    Yeah, yeah, yeah. I recognize that this question should demonstrate your creative problem solving, but it seems to me that 9 times out of 10, a lot of technical "problems" out there are created by extremely stupid business requirements wich all too often come from extremely stupid business people. It's amazing sometimes how speaking to them in thier own insipid psudo-language (especially in front of thier peers) can slap them into reality. Granted, they won't stay in reality long, but the fresh air and change of scenery can do them some good with repeated visits:)
  • Re:MS vs. Google (Score:5, Insightful)

    by iwadasn ( 742362 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:30PM (#13008699)

    One of my friends worked for Google, and he told me their stories. We both worked for Microsoft. Google is FAR more arrogant. Among other things, they decided to open a branch in India because they've "exhausted the talent supply in the United States." This is all the more remarkable because they only have a few thousand employees, only a few hundred in NYC. Apparently they've got all 300 or so good programmers in NYC. That certainly came as a shock to me, especially considering that most other places in NYC pay MUCH more than Google does. Perhaps they've exhausted the supply of talented people willing to work for half the industry standard wage?

    In any case, arrogance breeds downfall, soon enough. Most of the Microserfs I met were not terribly arrogant, not moreso than your average techie at least. Though Google loving seems to be the order of the day, I'm not such a fan. A company valued at 100x earnings that thinks it vomits sunshine, well, granny's pension fund is going to lose some money.
  • by slashrogue ( 775436 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:31PM (#13008717)
    I usually get slapped in the face at the drink offering step. :\

    A better analogy is credit card offers. They obviously want your money but they still need to check your credit history before they decide if you're worthy or not.
  • by Anonymous Brave Guy ( 457657 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @06:37PM (#13008789)

    Yeah, the presumptive attitude of this sort of company amazes me. I don't care who they are; if they invited me to interview with them then they'd better make a sales pitch to me as part of the interview.

    What these places always seem to forget is that any good candidate is going to be assessing them during the interview process as well. Are their managers practical, or doublespeak weenies? Do their technical guys know their stuff? Are their offices smart and professional-seeming? Is everyone working 10-hour-days with no focus on anything but the job, or do they actually seem to have a life and a sense of humour as well?

    If I ask these things automatically, as a good but not spectacularly qualified developer, what do they think someone with a solid PhD and 20+ years of experience doing serious work for serious employers is going to do? He's certainly going to consider trivial logic puzzles a waste of his time, I'd imagine, and frankly, who'd blame him?

  • by flithm ( 756019 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @07:05PM (#13009070) Homepage
    That's a fine statement to make... at least under normal circumstances. But before you make such a statement you should really do your research first.

    Seriously take a look at what this guy has done. He's not just some spoon fed fresh of the academic train PhD.

    This is a seriously smart guy with the experience to back it up.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @07:08PM (#13009093)
    >Morons do not get PhD's.

    Son, would you care to place a small wager on that?
  • by mav[LAG] ( 31387 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @07:41PM (#13009367)
    If there's a more striking ancodote than this about the difference between a competent engineer's view of the world and Microsoft's, I've yet to read it.

    It's all here. Mr AC, obvously a thoughtful and experienced engineer, thinks about good design from the ground up, making sure the subsystems are modular and robust and that the entire device is practical. The Microsoft interviewer doesn't give a toss about whether it's stable or not - just whether it has connectivity enough to sync with Outlook.

    I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
  • by IDIIAMOTS ( 553790 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @07:43PM (#13009375)
    Were you interviewing for a developer or a program manager (PM) position? If you were getting interviewed for a PM, then your answer was inappropriate for that position. PMs are supposed to design features on an item and how to intergrate it with other things to "add value". If you were interviewing for a developer position then I think the answer you gave was spot on. In that case you had a shoddy interviewer who should not have been on the developer interview loop.
  • by Krach42 ( 227798 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @07:47PM (#13009404) Homepage Journal
    I'll chime in under you, because you seem to be on-topic to what I'm planning on saying.

    First, Microsoft interviews are not "How would you move Mt. Fuji?" questions anymore. Microsoft asks hardly ANY of these interview questions anymore.

    Second, Microsoft has a recruiting group that works on campus. There are two ways to enter their system. Either, A.) you submit an application, or B.) a recruiter hears about you, and starts selling you to groups, or the group themselves gets a recruiter out to talk to you.

    Now, Microsoft has not actually researched how much you know about any particular field, they just know that you studied in it. So, naturally the first they they're going to want to do, is find out if you actually know what you're talking about. The only way to do this is to ask you technical questions.

    If they've come after you, you can be sure that they're not looking at you to see if you're an "out of the box" thinker. They don't *need* you to be. If Microsoft contacts you, they have a very good idea of what job they want you to do, and they want to make sure that you know that field, and that you would be able to fit in with the group, and also that you'd be able to handle the work.

    If you want a job with a good company, there are some hoops you have to jump through. And just because it lists on your resume that you know XY technology, does not mean that you know it. I mean, COME ON! How many people lie on their resume, and you think they should TRUST it implicitly? They *do* need a short little tech interview to find out if your resume is anywhere near accurate.

    I can almost guarentee you that this guy was not asked questiosn like "Why are manhole covers round?"
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @07:47PM (#13009407)
    Who gives a crap about Microsoft.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @08:50PM (#13009876)
    Actually, if you get to the big boss manager guy at the end that's a very good sign that all of the previous interviewers liked you to a significant degree. Sorry to say this, but if you hadn't taken the "oh well, they aren't hiring me" attitude, you might've gotten the job.

    As far as the guy asking the MCSD questions, chances are it was his first interview, and was more of a practice run for him, rather than a test of your skills.
  • by demachina ( 71715 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @09:05PM (#13009967)
    Well to be honest I think a "pop quiz" is a perfectly correct thing to do in an interview, I don't care who the interviewee is. I think Microsoft is kind of lucky the guy walked because he apparently has a prima donna attitude that he is way to "good" to be subjected to a basic test to see if he knows his stuff. He would probably be way to "good" to work in a team where people aren't worshipping his PhD'ness.

    I've met more than few PhD's over the years who are so disconnected from reality, due in part to spending most of their adult life in a university, that they need to stay in an ivory tower because they will be useless to you if you are trying to develop and ship a product in the dirty, ugly, nasty, imperfect real world. They apparently nailed the process of getting grades and doing dissertations but some of them start coasting once they have the PhD, and just think "big thoughts". From them on they settle in to the concept they just have to say, look I have a PhD, so I don't really need to do anything to earn the paycheck.

    Its a lot easier than you think for people to do a snow job to get through college, and then on references, resumes and interviews so you think they will perform for you and then once you hire them it turns out they don't. If you actually challenge their knowledge though, with something they can't snow you on, that is a good interviewer.

    Part of the point of the pop quiz isn't necessarily if they even know the answer. its how they handle the pressure, and if they don't know the answer if they can convince you that they know how to find the answer. This guy handled it by showing he was to f**kin good to even be quizzed. Thank you, don't want you buddy, will call if we need an egotistical opera singer.

    When I interview I give pop quizes but they are usally open book or open computer rather. I want to see that the person can find the answer, without having to crutch off the people around them.

    If its for a programming job I routinely ask them to find a bug or bugs in a simple program. If you cant do that then you are more con artist than programmer.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @09:07PM (#13009980)
    An in-car coffee maker is a bad idea. You're talking about adding an easily-accessible, scalding--or worse--source of liquid to the interior of the automobile. If there's a car accident, you're probably going to end up with hot coffee burning someone. This is all fine and dandy when people bring their own lava java to your car, but adding your own standard production mechanism will probably open you up to all sorts of lawsuits. Your pot was brewing too hot and it burnt my baby, your pot flew out and hit me during the accident, your pot was too difficult to remove and so I pulled on it until it flew out and sprayed hot coffee everywhere, etc.

    It's also difficult to imagine where you would obtain the water from. You don't want to have a large reservoir that's out-of-sight (say under the hood near other car fluids), because someone will fill it up and leave the water for a month before making a pot of coffee, accidentally pour anti-freeze into it, or pour poisons into the reservoir when someone parks the car (and of course relatives of the victims will try to blame you for obscuring the danger), or otherwise find a way to make themselves ill or dead. If you add a filter to the source of water, it will need to be easily-accessible for regular replacement and indicate to the owner that it should be changed to avoid ineptitude-induced complaints.

    If you put the reservoir inside of the interior, you'll have to fight for space with other dash items. Stereos, safety devices, temperature controls, and so forth. You'll also have to contend with the annoyance of having to bring fresh water to the inside of the automobile in such a way that it's easy to fill the reservoir. If the reservoir holds enough fluid for more than one cup of coffee, customers are going to spill water all over the inside of their car unless you construct some sort of add-on for carrying and filling the reservoir. If you make this device then they'll need a place to store it, so you need to find a place in the car (so that it can be used during road trips) where it can be stored without drastically reducing passenger or storage space.

    You need to really worry about how heat will be disposed of, and what neighboring materials will be used to prevent fires or chemical poisoning from heated plastics. You have to make certain that no moving parts of the interior of the car can be positioned in such a manner that they will be heated by the coffee pot. This means things like levers and seats especially.

    The console of the car will need to be made resistent to water and vapor. If the user spills an entire pot of hot coffee on the console, you need to be reasonably certain that no damage or fires will result. You can't allow typical vapor exhaust from the heating process to damage CDs or CD players.

    To be honest, syncing the coffee pot with your PDA is probably the easiest problem. Once you have a computerized system safely integrated into the car, making it programmable is easy. Integrating it in such a way as to be safe and convenient, now that's the hard part.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @10:16PM (#13010354)
    By knowingly standing silently by while a lie is told, you make your self party to it. After all, as the sales-techy guy, you are there precisely so the customer will think that any technical misinformation will be corrected. And you put "unified image" above that ?

    Let me ask you this . . . suppose that the sales was to a small rural 911 system operator, and you know they don't have their own tech guy to check up on anything. Are you still going to stand silent and present a unified but false image, Lucas ?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @10:33PM (#13010448)
    That has got to be the stupidiest thing I've ever heard.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @11:41PM (#13010831)
    I completely disagree, I worked for a company that employed MANY morons with PhD's. I'm not just saying that, I'm telling you people that got PhD's in things akin to basketweaving and rubber stamping. All that mattered to the company was that it was "Dr. So and So".
  • Re:remakes (Score:2, Insightful)

    by drsquare ( 530038 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @11:51PM (#13010883)
    You must be joking. The old Italian Job was a classic, the new one is utter garbage. Not a seeming redeeming aspect. For another shitty remake, see the War of the Worlds. The sooner Spielburg is ousted as the overrated hack he is, the better.
  • Re:MS vs. Google (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @11:54PM (#13010905)
    I can back up that data point.

    I just went through the interview process myself at both companies and Google is way more arrogant.

    At MS it started with an on campus interview with an HR rep.
    Then they flew me out to Redmond for a day of interviews.
    I started with 3 interviews with 2 groups, but since I was doing well I got two more.
    The last interview was with a senior manager. By this point they had clearly decided they wanted me since the interviews became more about convincing me to come to work there, then testing my ability.

    MS was tuff, Google was worse.
    First there was a phone screening. Then two interviews at the NYC office. Then they flew me out to Mountain View where I had five interviews. When I left Mountain View they told me they would let me know about another round of phone interviews with two senior managers, and a wirting sample. At this point I had an offer from MS and was getting really fed up with jumping through all these hoops.

    As it turns out Google's "Employment council" (I kid you not, that's actually what they call it) decided I shouldn't proceed to the next round. So I didn't have that last interview, or the writing sample.

    Two thoughts:

    Google's hiring philosophy is that it's really hard to get rid of people so they would rather turn away ten well qualified candidates then let one bad one in. This may be pragmatic but if you go through the interviews and don't get the job it seems really arrogant.

    Also, while the process is about finding only the best candidates, it also serves as a form of hazing. The more grueling the process the more valuable the reward (a job) seems. Also fostering a feeling that a company's employees are the best of the best is good for moral, even if it makes everyone else think you are arrogant.
  • agreed (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 08, 2005 @01:22AM (#13011252)
    I've worked a couple contracts at Microsoft and yea there are some prima donna douche bag like any big company. Additionally, when the oh so fussy project manager was a part time cam-whore, it's easy to laugh off bullshit.

    However, I will say that the level of horseshit at Google is beyond measure. The thing about Google is everyone that made that place great has already made millions and have moved on to other things so what's left is a bunch of college kids still wet behind the ears who want to pretend they were "part of it".

    It's the spoiled rotten kids of the self made millionaire syndrome. Microsoft had it for a while, now Google has it.
  • by crucini ( 98210 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @01:23AM (#13011258)
    This is a tricky question, and I think both the candidate and you missed the key. The key is design. You have to elicit the requirements from the interviewer and design around them.
    Talking about WIFI at the end is just a way of saying, "you forgot to ask me what I want."
    This question tests whether you realize that design must be responsive to requirements. Most geeks don't.
  • Code of ethics (Score:2, Insightful)

    by hlee ( 518174 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @01:29AM (#13011283)
    I feel compelled to counterbalance the slew of disconcerting responses by pointing out that some companies hold their employees to a code of ethics.

    We have in our employee handbook clear ethical codes of conduct that include treating our customers in a fair and honest manner. After all, no one wants to feel they were screwed over. This is especially true for companies that actually rely on customers to renew lucrative maintenance contracts and application upgrades on the account of positive experiences.

    Having said that, even if your company expected all of you to be honest, disputing your fellow salesperson during their presentation smacks of poor judgement on your part, and a lack of professionalism on the part of your company. By professionalism, I mean the entire briefing should be smoothly run, yet deliver correct information. It is important that the presenter is in control, so establish protocols to interrupt so the salesperson can elect when to pause to speak with you, if it can't wait to the end.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 08, 2005 @03:29AM (#13011688)
    Reality check here mate.

    Given the THREE bits of information: The graph, the code, and the problem.

    The point we are all trying to make is that recursion IN THIS SCENARIO reduces:

    1) Your overhead (as measured in program execution time).
    2) The amount of data stored (per cached node).
    3) Memory management issues.
    4) The work involved in writing/maintaining the code.

    As far as algorithm complexity goes -- big O notation - the two approaches are equivalent. However recursion wins big on implementation and runtime efficiencies.

    Linux is nothing more than a convenient readily available example to demonstrate relevant issues.

    Sheesh. You can lead a horse to water. But you can't hit them over the head with a clue-by-four.

  • by byteherder ( 722785 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @06:00AM (#13012074)
    1. Have Japanese government name a much small mountian, Mt. Fuji.

    2. Move that mountain.

    3. Declare that you have moved Mt. Fuji.

    4. Charge everyone as if you have moved the bigger mountain.
  • by friendswelcome ( 894576 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @08:59AM (#13012662) Homepage
    How would you move Mount Fugi?

    By realising the truth. The mountain moves, as does the world it stands on.

    There is no spoon.
  • by BranMan ( 29917 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @09:25AM (#13012816)
    He'd already stated his problem to be solved - an in-car coffee maker. So the candidate is expected to treat his customer as an idiot and grill him for hidden / forgotten / unstated requirements? If he did that with every question the interview would take a week and he'd look like a pedantic lawyer more than anything else.
    No, I think the candidate got it right - if they want a more specific answer, then they need to ask a better question.
  • Re:Spam (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Master of Transhuman ( 597628 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @01:18PM (#13014777) Homepage

    Windows Server 2003 is a bloated, unmitigated piece of shit. It's nearly impossible to use because you can't find anything in the hundreds of services, management consoles, menus and dialog boxes, ALL of which have some kind of effect on each other.

    It needs to be shrunk about fifty percent to be usable. That would put it somewhere around Linux which is at least comprehensible.

    And it's unreliable - it screws up even in an college training lab doing canned exercises. And when it screws up, you can't possibly find out why or where, so a reboot is the only thing that might shake it loose - until the next time - which will be within a few days at most.

    And Longhorn promises to be even worse.

    More desktop apps for Linux? How many does the average end user actually use? Almost everything the average user is likely to use is already included. How much would the equivalent software COST on Windows? Ten grand? Twenty grand?

    What IS needed is more enterprise level apps - which is no problem since the Java tools to build same are becoming available from dozens of open source projects.

    RAD tools? RAD tools lead to crap software because design takes a back end to "get the shit out the door". This is WHY Windows is crap - their design practices (and hiring practices which is the point of the discussion) are crap. RealBASIC? Gimme a break. I don't how much you twist and pull BASIC, it's a crap language not intended for serious development work.

    Stop cashing those Microsoft propaganda checks and get a clue.

Everybody likes a kidder, but nobody lends him money. -- Arthur Miller

Working...