[dec0dedab0de]

I would add

Am I allowed to have side projects that I own?

Am I allowed to contribute to open source from work? ie bugfixes for libraries we use.

How many meetings are there in an average month?

Does your insurance cover my preferred doctors? (obviously more of an email question)

How strict are the requirements in whatever tracking software we use (jira,rally, etc)

How many required programs are there? Outlook? Slack? Teams? Jira? Timesheets? Confluence? sharepoint? skype? etc

How locked down are the computers/network?

Am I able to use whatever development tools I choose without asking permission?

Why did the person before me leave?

[lmilcin]

> Am I allowed to have side projects that I own? > Does your insurance cover my preferred doctors? (obviously more of an email question)

Your contract specifies that and other answers to other questions. Don't ask your interviewer this question, the only thing he/she can do is rely to HR. Best ask HR directly.

> Why did the person before me leave?

It is unlikely you are ever going to get answer to that and even if you get it, it will have low value.

First, there does not necessarily exist a link between your position and the person before you. If you are a developer then it is more like a pool with new developers replenishing losses over time.

Second, a lot of people do not really know why they leave.

Third, even if they do know, they do not give truthful answer. They might be saying something like "I needed a change", or they might be rationalising it in some way, where in fact they just got a better offer from FB.

Fourth, as an interviewer you might not be privvy to that information officially.

Fifth, even if, by accident you got to know this information privately, I still don't feel ok passing private information especially one that can be basically gossip.

[dec0dedab0de]

If I'm interviewing with a future teammate, then they should know what the contract is. If the company is so big that they have bespoke employment contracts, then the first interview is usually HR.

As far as the person im replacing, that's more of a poker move to feel out if there is a toxic boss driving people away. Perhaps a better way to do that would be to ask about the turnover rate for the team/department/company?

[lmilcin]

The contract that the interviewer has may not look anything like the one you are going to get. The only contract that matters is the one you sign.

Every company will negotiate the contract with you and they will frequently be happy to negotiate other things than just your bare salary. There might be things that you care more than others and the company will be happy to provide you with.

A lot of people treat the contract as a formality. Don't. The contract is there for you to feel safe and for the company to get what they need, too. This is the actual agreement between you, everything you had before should lead to writing down what you figured out in form of a contract.

As to asking for reasons of previous person leaving, I think turnover rate is definitely better question. One that can be followed with an actual discussion about the reasons for this or the actions that are being implemented, etc.

[dec0dedab0de]

You're right, but I wouldn't want to have a special contract for things I believe should be standard decency. As long as I was in the position to turn down a job that is.

Actually, maybe the question I really want to ask is Can everyone have side projects?

[the-dude]

> I think turnover rate is definitely better question

They lied about that too.

[ryanbrunner]

Even if a potential teammate has an overly restrictive IP clause, in my experience a lot of companies are genuinely using boilerplate, never thought about it much, and are happy to redline to "Company's IP if on company time / company equipment / directed by company". I don't think it's inappropriate to bring it up with a manager, but I wouldn't trust any answer until you get to contract negotiation.

[Dayshine]

Unless you're at the strange faang companies which do intake without finding you a team first: one of your interviewers should be your like manager, who can get these amendments made to your contract, and should know the answer.

[lmilcin]

That depends.

I personally believe manager should be hiring their team. If only for the candidate to meet the manager and have a chance to make their decision based on the fit.

But I also was many times asked to stand in for another person. Maybe the manager was very busy and he trusted me I can do good job?

In any case, if you go for a large company and for a long haul it is likely you are going to be changing managers (but still it is good to get to know the first one).

[icedchai]

This is one of the problems with a company my friend is at. They do intake without preference to a specific team. They also do re-orgs every 3 to 6 month, so even if they did, the team you interview for might not exist for long anyway. He's on his third team in less than a year. People randomly get moved around due to dysfunction, etc.

[duped]

> As a general rule, the only job of interviewer is to decide whether you are fit for the role.

These days half the job is convincing the candidate to accept an offer if it comes through.

[hammock]

That's how it always has been, if you're getting good candidates.

[denysvitali]

My go-to question is:

Am I able to use Linux?

This tells you a lot about the company. I avoided some Windows-only jobs in the past :)

[BeetleB]

I thought that way before my current job. I learned the error of my ways. In companies like mine, you'll get a Linux account on a server, and will not have root privileges. So you're quite limited on the SW you can easily install (try installing Emacs with all its dependencies from source).

Since then, whenever I shifted teams, I'd pick ones where I don't have to use Linux. At least I can customize my Windows laptop easily, and Emacs works just fine on it.

[wink]

That's a weird experience. 100% of companies I worked for (or where I worked with a customer's computer, so not just 3-4) it was:

Windows = managed, user account, pain (sometimes exceptions for developers, sometimes not)

Linux = you have root on your machine.

[BeetleB]

My windows laptop is "managed" in terms of forced IT updates, etc. But I can install whatever I want and have Admin privileges. They do scan the SW and if they see obvious problems (installed a SW that is not free for commercial use), I'll get an email about (show proof that the team purchased a license).

I can't make deep changes (e.g. reinstall the OS), and would likely get in trouble for disabling the antivirus, but there hasn't been anything I wanted to do on it that I couldn't.

[phendrenad2]

This really bothers me when I see it. I've had coworkers who used Linux. Like you say, IT mostly left them alone. They had root and were free to install anything. That seems like a huge security hole. Keeping Linux, especially desktop Linux, patched is non-trivial, and I wouldn't leave that up to the average web developer.

[ipaddr]

I've avoided jobs that are Mac only. Life is too short.

[Steltek]

Even if you're allowed to use Linux, you still end up getting a Mac to support your coworkers. I suppose I can be grateful that Docker Desktop is slowly fading away. Sadly Homebrew is too essential to die and the ${g} prefix remains for random commands.

[pseudoramble]

> I suppose I can be grateful that Docker Desktop is slowly fading away.

May I ask why you're grateful? I'm pretty inexperienced with Docker/Kubernetes/containers in general. So there's probably a good reason I'm unaware of.

Docker Desktop was nice for me to run the one or two basic things I needed. I've moved away due to the licensing changes, but I'd like to understand why it was a problem.

[Steltek]

MacOS Docker had performance problems and odd limitations because it was really a Linux VM under the hood (Darwin can't run containers) and any host passthru stuff needed that additional hypervisor translation, which wasn't always perfect either.

People raising bugs against "production" wouldn't tell you that they found it their Macbook so you'd go on a wild goose chase thinking it was a real issue and not simply MacOS sucking.

Alternately, you'd write a script to do something (flash hardware, etc) and it wouldn't work because Certified Real UNIX(tm) doesn't have /proc or /sys. Now you're asked to port the script to Mac, which depending on the task might be wildly more difficult, but if you don't willingly bash your head against Apple's hatred for low level hacking, you're not a team player or something.

[pseudoramble]

Gotcha. Thanks that helps. I can definitely see that translation between the VM and the container being a problem.

[lapetitejort]

I like to ask what version of software they're running, and why. You might catch some change-adverse or bleeding-edge jockeys that way.

[yjftsjthsd-h]

My favorite question as an interviewer is "What's your favorite OS of all time and why?"; the what is almost irrelevant and there are no right or wrong answers, but the whys are always useful/interesting (my favorite is probably a guy who raved about AIX's apparently amazing backup functionality).

[wink]

I raise you a "I like SuSE Linux because it's free". To this day I don't know what to make of this answer. But that was only one of many answers that led to us not continuing with that candidate.

That day I changed my stance "there are no wrong answers", but I've also asked this in the past and it can yield some good conversation material.

[yjftsjthsd-h]

To be clear, I meant that there are no wrong "what" answers, but there are definitely "why" answers that would reflect badly on a candidate.

[jaaron]

Really depends on the sort of "windows-only" jobs you're thinking of.

My startup is mostly Windows, but that's because we're doing AAA game development and still have some tooling that is Windows only at this stage.

I find that with WSL2, I can do everything I need. A fair bit of my day is spent in emacs.

[dec0dedab0de]

Really depends on the sort of "windows-only" jobs you're thinking of.

I was hoping you were going to follow that up by saying you're working on a robot to clean vertical glass.

[tragictrash]

Underrated comment of the century

[yjftsjthsd-h]

This is probably just a personal thing, but that just defines which areas of our industry I probably don't want to work in. And WSL isn't helpful, because the goal for me isn't "run Linux", but "don't run Windows"; WSL won't save you from MS forcing updates down your throat, changing your browser to edge, spying on you, and sticking ads all over the system.

[mcny]

> WSL won't save you from MS forcing updates down your throat

There was only one corporate laptop running windows 10 I've encountered during the pandemic that does not use policy to disable automatic updates and that is Microsoft. In my experience, everyone who pays for Windows Enterprise blocks automatic updates.

I think Windows Home still can't into Hyper-V and therefore you have to go through hoops to install WSL 2 and docker, right?

[mook]

Windows Home doesn't haven proper access to Hyper-V, but installing WSL 2 is relatively easy (and documented); Microsoft made special provisions for that. You can't use Docker to run Windows containers, but Linux containers (using WSL 2) seems to work fine.

[mrtranscendence]

One of my former coworkers who's an absolutely huge Apple guy recently left for another job. When I asked him whether he could use a Mac he told me he didn't know and hadn't asked ... he must've really wanted that job. Or really hated his old one.

I'd take a job that let me use Linux, but I too am a Mac guy at heart. I had a short stint on Windows not long ago and hated it. Where I work now they'll give developers Macs by default, though getting blanket approval for data scientists has been an uphill battle, stupidly enough.

[blahyawnblah]

Windows with WSL2 is great. Have you tried that?

VSCode can run from WSL2 and have access to its file system

[lnxg33k1]

Wsl 1/2 are quite painful, but the issue is also windows, you might get a wsl3 that is good and it would still be surrounded by windows, i would still tolerate windows but Microsoft isn't offering windows to you as a product that gets out of the way, doesn't touch defaults, doesn't show you ads on the desktop etc, it's using a software to push on you other stuff, so nein

So there are many companies and many projects and i don't work with any Microsoft technology, for me it makes sense to just dodge any company that doesn't allow me any kind of Linux on daily driver, it's just that for me it makes sense, it's not a huge effort, it's not a huge sacrifice, it would be a sacrifice accepting a job with windows/mac when there are many more on linux

[epolanski]

I have exactly the opposite idea. I hate Mac and WSL2 is perfect for development. I've never seen an ad in windows 10 as well.

[lnxg33k1]

While one point of view is subjective, truth isn't, but I'll play the game and ask you if i and others news source are just having a collective visions https://duckduckgo.com/?q=windows+10+ads+start&t=fpas&ia=web

[tragictrash]

Tell me you don't use Linux without telling me you don't use linux

Wsl is pretty terrible in my experience. your better off using a vm you manage yourself. Every vendor has shared folders. Each one can use a x server to display programs in your windows window manager.

[ygjb]

Oh please. Tell me you are a Linux zealot without telling me you are a Linux zealot. Its a tool in the toolbox. I use Linux everyday on servers at work, two desktops at home, and servers for my partners businesses.

My main personal notebook is a windows device w/WSL and my main work notebook is a MacOS device, because at the end of the day, I need my computer's to just work, painlessly.

WSL is great for alot of Linux userspace stuff and is a fantastic CLI for interacting with and managing remote servers, alongside the ease of Windows. Of course it's not as performance, and had some edges, but I happily accept the trade-offs due to great driver support and the flexibility to run almost any software on one device.

[tragictrash]

I think you misunderstood that remark intended to be humorous. Its too bad you took offense.

Your right about it being a tool. A tool which has better alternatives.

A virtual machine running in virtual box or some other vendor's VM has literally none of the limitations that wsl2 does.

WSL 2 Doesn't fully support all userspace stuff, I bump into that all the time.

You can ssh into other boxes using PowerShell.

It is objectively bad compared to the alternatives.

[jbluepolarbear]

Tell me you don’t use WSL without telling me you don’t use WSL.

I use WSL everyday and it’s no different than using native Linux. What’s so terrible? It’s easy to setup and easy to add to windows terminal.

[tragictrash]

File system performance sucks. No fuse support. No direct hardware access. I've experienced stability issues with it. Don't get me started on the networking or custom init put in by Microsoft. Systemctl calls don't work.

It is most definitely not just like regular Linux.

I actually used it pretty extensively for years before I figured out it was causing more friction than it was worth. It's convenient, I'll give you that, but again, it's objectively worse than the other tools available. You should try them.

[8note]

X servers suck though.

Vscode renders sharply without having to do extra work.

Both wsls are reasonably enjoyable. Much better than ssh-ing to a Linux host

[tragictrash]

You realize your using an x server to do that, right? It's just one thats bundled in with windows, and you don't have to configure.

[mrtranscendence]

When I was on Windows I did try WSL, but I had problems with the corporate VPN/proxy. IIRC I essentially had no network connectivity from the WSL side.

Edit: Thinking about it some more, I believe I was able to get WSL1 to work but not WSL2, unfortunately.

[tpmx]

I was hired to create a software department in a well-funded , but "old" hardware-oriented company with ~100 employees. In retrospect it's "funny" how much time I spent trying to get the company to accept that developers should be able to use e.g. Linux/Mac, rather than Windows. It tooks several weeks of actual time spent. Insane.

I got there eventually. It's one of those things you don't expect, having worked with smart and flexible software people your entire previous work life. These hardware people were smart, but also incredibly "square", for the lack of a better term. Everything was so insanely rigid.

So much more to tell, but in general: be aware that hardware company culture is very, very different. I don't think it's possible to change the culture unless you change the CEO.

[Osiris]

Is it common for jobs to restrict your choice in development environment? In 15 years I've never been required to use any particular operating system.

[tdeck]

There are a lot of companies that are absolutely Windows only shops. There are also lots of tech companies where everyone gets a Macbook and that's what you use, although I suppose you could use Linux if you're able to hack up the dev enviroent to work yourself.

[colordrops]

I won't take a job with Apple for this reason.

[HelloNurse]

Everyone has their own allergies. I can live without Linux, but I'd ask whether there is any IBM software involved.

[nemoniac]

Good question! My answer would be, not only will you be able to use Linux, you will have to use it. What does that tell you about my company? ;)

[bo1024]

had a great gig at microsoft, answer was yes

[ryandrake]

I remember vividly interviewing for a Bay Area tech company and asking about their policy on side projects and open source contribution, and the interviewer got really cagey and basically said he didn't know but don't worry too much about it. Got rejected for the role and surprisingly the recruiter was very forthcoming about the reason: Don't remember the actual words but he said that my interest in working on side projects was a red flag and showed I wouldn't devote 100% to the role. Leadership apparently insisted that candidates asking about these kinds of things were not good fits.

I feel I really dodged a bullet there! Thank you, anonymous recruiter for being unusually candid in post-interview feedback!

[jbluepolarbear]

That’s more a red flag for that company.

[the-dude]

% Why did the person before me leave?

They just lied to me. That was a painful year.

[jbluepolarbear]

This happened to me in 2020. Interviewed and they said that the previous person left for a more creative role. I was told I’d be lead and have the authority to steer the product to get them ready to release games in 6-12 months. They lied about everything, I was told day one that I wasn’t lead, that I wasn’t gonna be doing the job I was hired for, and that I’d have to get their broken game engine (that they didn’t own) in a state to ship games. It was the longest 6 months of my life.

[AlexCoventry]

If you don't mind talking about it, I'd be curious to know why you stuck around.