Law aside, it is unpractical. All companies are starved for cooks, and by collaborating to keep salaries low, they are preventing the job market from expanding.
I had heard horror stories of Google hiring practice: long timelines, brainteasers, GPA, top schools etc. Hence I had never really considered Google as an option. Then a recruiter got in touch and scheduled the interviews. I wasn't sure if I even wanted to go in. But I did. And it turned out to be the best interview experience I ever had. By far. I didn't make the offer and despite that I felt great about the process and myself. I called up all my talented friends and encouraged them to apply at Google. They have definitely gotten this right.
As with most things, anecdotes are anecdotes. There are many horror stories and many great experience stories. But the bottom line was that it is important to Google and that was why they had folks go through a pretty detailed training class and they often took candidate feedback through the hiring committees back to the interviewers.
Disclosure: I worked there for four years and interviewed a lot of people.
I've also done an interview at google and would have to agree.
I decided to take another offer. I'm sure google's offer would have been great, but the timeline was taking too long, and I wanted to start at the other place, so I didn't wait for it (2 weeks at that point).
I had a similar experience. Google's interviews were generally great (and the interviewers were kind -- it might have helped that I generally did well in them), but the overall process was far slower than some startups and I eventually had to shut down the process at Google to take another offer that was too good to turn down.
The bottom line is that, unless you request everything to be expedited from the beginning, it can take a few months to finish the entire process with Google. Even requesting a schedule change to be made would take about half a week for me. At least that was my experience -- I can't speak for others.
>it can take a few months to finish the entire process with Google.
That is not too bad for such a large company really. Personally I have always worked for small software companies where the hiring process frequently consists of one interview, a bit of a programming test and an offer all concluded in 72 hours (frequently less). Compared to that a few months seems slow but I once had a friend get hired as a trader at a huge international financial organization and that took a glacial 6 months.
Whats more there was the expectation that you would more or less just walk out on whatever job you happened to have accepted in the interim, get on a plane and fly to where they wanted you as soon as you finally received an offer. Looking back on it I suspect that agreeing to that was itself part of their selection criteria.
I had heard similar things and wasn't really considering Google either, but a friend there recommended that I apply so I did. The recruiter I interacted with was moderately (but, I suppose, understandably) condescending, and the phone interviewer combative---he also apparently hadn't bothered looking at my resume, apparently assuming I was still in college (I've been out of college for a decade).
I thought it was to disorient you a bit. If you typically snooze three times you know you have to be out of the bed at 8:00 sharp (with 7:30 original). Easy for your brain to latch on to that. Now with 9 mins…
Congrats on the launch! You are in a space close to money (Sales) and that will help you. However, the site needs work. It didn't convey clearly what the product is and didn't get me excited enough to try it. I'm your potential customer.
Hi. I moved to the Bay Area last week. I'm a family guy with little kids. I split my time between San Mateo and San Jose. Regular tech job. In about 6 months I will start lookin for a house to buy. I don't mind upto 50 mins of commute each way. Any recommendations?
Having just left the Bay Area for the UK I will have to second the recommendations made by others to look in the Campbell and Willow Glen areas. Throw the Cambrian area of San Jose into the mix as well (you will end up with lower house costs due to not being in the prime areas but it is otherwise equivalent.) The primary and middle schools are highly ranked, the high school for that area is a bit sketchy but improving. 280 and 85 are close and light rail out of downtown Campbell gets you to Didiron station in two stops for easy access to Caltrain. San Mateo is up 280 to 92 and across; not a great commute when traffic is ugly, but better than just about any other path in that direction.
It depends on your down payment and your salary. Does your wife work? Are you open to sending your kids to a mediocre school or do you want them to attend a private a school?
All areas with good schools will run you over 1M for a house. A place that isn't ghetto with mediocre to bad schools will run you about 750k.
Those cities are way, way out there and absolute commute gridlock hell. You also need to understand just how dense the suburban strip-mall monotony gets once you cross the hill...
East Bay (Walnut Creek / San Ramon area) has houses ~700-800k in top 1% of school districts in the country. Check zillow where each house for sale has assigned schools and their ranking. Commute is 45 min to city by Bart and 1hr to south bay.
You probably want to live in the San Jose area. There are a lot of good neighborhoods like Willow Glen or Campbell. Get a place close to I-280 rather than US-101. 101 is not as well maintained and it's crowded all day.
San Mateo is not a bad place to live, especially if you like urban areas. Rent is more expensive there, though, and there is more traffic.
