Some ex-Microsofties pine to leave the Googleplex

Google is dominating Microsoft, right? Microsoft hasn't a clue, right?

According to a collection of blog posts from people that have worked at both Microsoft and Google, there's much more than meets the eye. In particular, it would appear that Microsoft, crusty thirty-year old that it is, has learned quite a bit about how to add process to enable (somewhat) smooth functioning at scale.

Google? Not so much.

As one ex-Microsoftie who joined Google, only to decide to return to Microsoft, puts it:

This orientation [at Google] towards cool, but not necessarily useful or essential software really affects the way the software engineering is done. Everything is pretty much run by the engineering - PMs and testers are conspicuously absent from the process. While they do exist in theory, there are too few of them to matter.

On one hand, there are beneficial effects - it is easy to ship software quickly...On the other hand, I was using Google software - a lot of it - in the last year, and slick as it is, there's just too much of it that is regularly broken. It seems like every week 10% of all the features are broken in one or the other browser. And it's a different 10% every week....

I heard similar complaints at a recent lunch with some friends that have deep ties into Google. Google has yet to learn how to put polish on products (by which I mean the total product, not the UI). It tends to start lots of projects in that "20 percent of employee time," and finish far fewer. Search is currently the tonic that covers a multitude of sins at Google, but will it do so forever?

Microsoft has its problems - plenty of them. But for those looking for structure and a career path, Google may not be the place to go.

[pscoop]

Right - like Microsoft doesn't have a different set of problems that end in a similar set of results. Like Microsoft doesn't shop broken software, and then deliver updates that fix one thing only to add another (different) bug or incompatibility. It seems to me it's just the nature of large software companies - there are going to be projects that fall into the gaps and never get the attention they deserve, or there are those projects which are so important they get too much attention (Vista anyone?) and end up getting spoiled by it. The balance between those two extremes is the ongoing challenge for large corporations. So here's the challenge for you Matt - how does Alfresco plan to attack this problem as it grows. Does having an open source product help provide a 'reality check' the prevents swinging from one extreme to the other?

[NuPharaoh]

Sounds like Google is using XP, by releasing often,and testing is done by developers(which will not need alot of testers) ...and maybe i am alone,,but i never see a HTTP404 using google, unlik the blue screen of death on windows, and other bugs.. when was "Google" ..and im loving Google Open Office... i think the microsoft guy who wrote this blog was just fired from google.

[mwdude]

The lack of structure in Google might be culturally intended; I presume it suits people who mind being told what to do, who don't like hierarchies and fossilised processes, and who are capable of organising their work themselves, without a manager breathing down their neck. Employment 2.0., so to speak.

[The_Decider]

That these people would go back to MS says more about them then the issues at Google.

[paulej]

I, too, have heard the same kinds of stories about Google's engineering methods. Good or bad, it is hard to say. Being a public company, what is ultimately important is profit. Google has plenty of that, so they can test various development approaches without getting beaten up. Now, is it search that rakes in the money? No. Not directly, at least. Search contributes to generation of targeted advertising, both on Google's web site and its thousands and thousands of Adsense customers' web sites. Adsense is how Google makes its fortune and that's precisely where a competitor like Microsoft could potentially kill Google's revenue stream. If Microsoft paid 20 to 50% more than Adsense, what do you think would happen to Google? Given that, combined with an insider view of an unfocused engineering team with no clear revenue strategy other than advertising, I can appreciate why some people would not want to stick around.