[borramakot]

Is there data on what tech companies programmers (either generally or new grads) most want to work for? It feels like it used to be Google by a lot, but even outside the HN bubble, I get the sense Google has taken some reputation hit.

[yaacov]

Anecdotal, graduated 1 year ago and have many new-grad friends looking for work now:

Airbnb is probably the most desirable non-fintech company, Uber and Lyft were in this category too before their IPOs.

Of megacorps, Facebook generally has the best new grad comp and benefits, and is therefore most desirable. Google is a close-ish second, Microsoft and Amazon are far behind due to lower comp and cultural issues (In Amazon’s case, this means terrible work/life balance, in Microsoft’s, perception that it’s boring due to enterprise culture and office locations in particularly bland suburbs).

Apple and Netflix aren’t really on the new-grad radar because they hire mostly experienced engineers.

[adventskalender]

I find that completely mind boggling, tbh. What gets people excited about AirBnB? Is this just about perks (salary and so on)?

Nothing against AirBnB, it might be a fine, solid company doing a good job. But what about them is inspiring?

[yaacov]

Most importantly, their comp is really good.

Second, it seems to me that there’s more room for growth at Airbnb than other companies with similar compensation. (This is an impression with no hard evidence to back it up)

[adventskalender]

Comp meaning compensation? OK, I could understand that.

[AndrewKemendo]

I don't think the data supports your conclusion about FB. See the below article from earlier in 2019.

"The company has seen a decline in its job offer acceptance rates to software engineer candidates from nearly 90% in late 2016 to almost 50% in early 2019."[1]

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/16/facebook-has-struggled-to-re...

[alasdair_]

From the article: "After the publication of this story, Harrison contacted CNBC to say “these numbers are totally wrong.”"

[ng12]

Are there fintech companies people are clamoring to work for?

[amznthrowaway5]

Some of the most skilled CS grads I know went to work for Jane Street.

[akhilcacharya]

I have the same YOE as you.

> Amazon are far behind due to lower comp and cultural issues (In Amazon’s case, this means terrible work/life balance, i

Radical candor time. How are Amazon new grads perceived?

[taurath]

I don't think its wise or effective to attempt extract information from someone by declaring "radical candor time." and offering little if any candor of their own.

Funnily enough, that fits my stereotype of how a person from Amazon would ask me.

[gautamnarula]

My evidence is mostly anecdotal too, but I have some insight into the new grad perspective both from being a recent new grad and running a site that aggregates new grad tech jobs [1].

Google is still pretty popular among new grads. Of the "Big 4" (Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft), Facebook seems to have taken the biggest hit reputationally, but is also still popular. Amazon is less popular due to the perception of its work culture and not being as engineering driven/having as high an engineering bar as Google/Facebook, but is also a popular choice.

I'd say the most popular are "unicorns" that are know for having a good culture, strong engineering, and a promising financial trajectory; Stripe and Airbnb are the two that most quickly come to mind.

[1] www.newgrad.tech

[akhilcacharya]

> Amazon is less popular due to the perception of its work culture and not being as engineering driven/having as high an engineering bar as Google/Facebook,

I’m a new grad that chose Amazon, what does the “not as high engineering bar” mean explicitly?

[amznthrowaway5]

Amazon has too many MBA TPMs (who don't actually know a thing about tech) and other non-technical folk running the show

[freedomben]

Would be interested in this too. Anecdatally, it seems like Amazon has really picked up among people who don't consider proprietary software to be unethical. G still has a better rep among the FOSS people. Of course my sample size is probably about 30 people, mostly from startups we've worked at together. Hardly representative of the target market for FAANG.

[gwright]

> proprietary software to be unethical

My sense is only a very small percentage (way less than 1%) of software developers think that proprietary software by definition is unethical. Am I wrong to think this?

[Nasrudith]

In a hard sense maybe from selection bias and counting only full time and far fewer who don't pay the rent. Maybe uo to like 5% or so if you can count academia among developers.

There is a sizable chunk who would prefer to work with non-properietary software if only for the ability to take a peak. The likely winner by raw numbers would be the "apathetics" who go wity whatever works.

[gwright]

> In a hard sense ...

What other sense is there? Or more specifically, what makes proprietary software innately unethical? It just seems like you have to radically distort the meaning of "proprietary" or "ethical" to make any sense of the concept and at that point you are just playing with semantics and not communicating clearly.

[pjmlp]

It would be welcomed if those ethics would be used to pay for the tooling as well.

Instead we keep getting posts on HN from companies that either go dual licenses, or completely proprietary to stay on business, or just switch business altogether.

[dunkelheit]

At least now there is growing recognition that there is a problem. Given that opensource simply makes sense for many categories of software, I am hopeful that a solution that is fair to both users and developers will be figured out eventually.

[zozbot234]

Well, it depends what kind of companies. I will happily concede that it's hard to sustain a Bay Area "unicorn" company purely on FLOSS development and support - unless that company happens to be named Red Hat.

[pjmlp]

Unethical is to use software from others, wanting to be paid for work, while not giving back a cent to those developers.

[freedomben]

I agree, which is one reason the FOSS types really don't like Amazon.

[pjmlp]

You mean the same ones that are anti-GPL and are responsible for the uptake of licences that allow companies like Amazon to do exactly what those licenses are for?

[freedomben]

I guess I don't know what you're talking about. I (and the people I'm referring to) are not anti-GPL. We don't use the GPL for everything because not everything needs it and without a doubt it hurts (or prevents) adoption, but we certainly do use it liberally.

[Reelin]

I'm puzzled by your comment. The GPL fails to prevent use of software within a proprietary cloud-based system (as has been the cause of much drama lately). AGPL or a similar license is required for that.

[techslave]

> among people who don't consider proprietary software to be unethical

wouldn’t that be nearly everyone? there are very, very few RMS’s in the world.

[scarmig]

There's plenty of middle ground. Lots of people--the majority, I'd say--treat open source as a positive and seek it out. But they also won't go with an inferior solution just to check the OSS purity box.

[freedomben]

I would agree with this. Personally I've tried to choose companies whose products are fully free/libre, and for the most part have had success with that. I am no RMS, but I have a strong preference for open solutions. Because of that my sample set is certainly biased toward others who at least feel the same.

[techslave]

i think there are very many folks with that stance. that is a very far cry from “unethical”.

[close04]

It would also be important to know why. Whether someone wants to work for a company despite its culture because of the other huge benefits of the job: interesting work and pay. At different points in the career or life one may put one aspect or the other at the top of their priorities list.