Google is for the people that want to put in the effort to pass a Google type interview. If you don't have a problem learning things then it is certainly in your reach.
I'm often reminded by how my grandparents would talk so highly of working at General Motors. To me it seemed so boring but at the time GM was considered one of the best companies to work for. I think today there is still a romanced idea that zen can be reached by getting a job at one of these types of companies.
In the meantime I'm sitting in my amazing downtown Austin home looking over my pool while I'm probablly a slightly above average developer working for startups that I find interesting. My partner is in the other room dreading the end of her holiday and having to go back to her Facebook job.
With all due respect. Don't say that about yourself!
Hit Ninu up and talk. What harm does it do. It if turns out you need to "bone up" a bit, bow you have a clear path that can get you employment at a later date. Google defers job offers all the time (or so I understand).
Nonsense. Show us what you're made of and learn to build confidence in your abilities. You never will know unless you try! SWE interviews at Google are challenging, no question, but they're also where you can shine presuming there is a command over the basics (data structures, algorithms, etc). You've built multiple apps and coded in various programming languages correct? Post a link to your Github and let's check it out.
This was before the revamp that maybe improved things, but here's a real Google interview story:
Interviewer: Do you know C?
Candidate: I wrote a tiny bit years ago, but not really.
Interviewer: Please write some C.
Also "data structures, algorithms" aren't the basics. The bullshit whiteboard puzzle crap algorithms stuff is irrelevant to 90% of actual programming. Including at Google.
In general Google does not have a good track record for hiring people with non-standard backgrounds except via acquisitions (where magically they do just fine) or if it's someone with a lot of experience. E.g. at least as of 5 years ago to be a product manager you needed a Computer Science degree. Knew one really good product manager who wouldn't have been hired by Google under those rules but had slipped in under older, more lenient rules. He only had a Computer Engineering degree and MBA.
Sorry but this is total nonsense and false encouragement. Let me translate what "command over the basics" means:
If you don't know your Floyd Warshall from your Tarjan from your Manacher then you'll just fumble around thinking you got close unless you have the remarkable gift of being able to derive these from scratch in a whiteboard situation. Also I cannot stress enough how difficult - and entirely pointless - a whiteboarding interview is.
edit: I didn't mean this to come across pessimistic and critical. I just think it's important to serve a dose of reality regarding the standard expected (and hopefully some pointers towards the kind of algorithms theory you should be not only comfortable with but also able to reproduce on a whiteboard under pressure).