[marcosdumay]

Programming on a projector is the stuff nightmares are made of... but it still beats a whiteboard.

Anyway, I don't think those boards are there to investigate ability. They are basically useless for that. If they have a rational motive at all, it's probably because the most strict schools teach the "assemble everything in your head, then write it" method, so they accidentally select people with good credentials.

[decebalus1]

> Programming on a projector is the stuff nightmares are made of... but it still beats a whiteboard.

It depends.

I recently had an onsite interview where I was handed a laptop to write code on, which was great. What was not great was that the interviewer was shadowed by 2 other developers and had to write the code while screensharing to the meeting room's screen. It was basically a meeting where people were looking at me go. It was by far the weirdest experience ever (and I've been doing this for decades). I kind of missed the 1:1 with the interviewer and a whiteboard.

[mjevans]

How about: bring a laptop with an HDMI port (or adapter) and a dev environment for "whiteboard" and "napkin" problems.

I'd be OK with an Interview like that, just don't laugh about the fact that my laptop is a still functional but otherwise aging smart terminal for securely connecting to my real workstations when I'm somewhere I don't trust.

[marcosdumay]

It's not the setup that is bad, it's how there are a lot of people focused on your code, noticing your typos before you do.

It's bad enough when you are in a position of power like in a presentation or a class. It's nearly unthinkable when you are in a position of weakness.