Frustration, Disappointment And Apathy: My Years At Microsoft

linux was the least mature. The kernel was a maze, there were 3 similar-but-fatally-different APIs for modules depending on where you graft them in (app, loadable driver, kernel driver), only 1 model of memory mapping was supported. And the code quality was very low. Nearly identical complete methods for trivial differences in argument (instead of calling common code). The same variable names used in different places for very, very different things (e.g. 'page' used for a page table entry, a page table pointer, a page directory pointer, a page directory, a page directory entry...) Spaghetti style code paths.

A large company like MS may have no coherent ethics or direction. But they have Lots of resources to actually, completely, exhaustively complete a code module with everything tested and in place.

So the products may not be great, or apply perfectly to solve your problem. Consider we're developers and our problems are pretty not much on MS's mind anyway. But they are responsibly coded and completed, which is a big thing.

Bill gates had vision to make millions of jobs.

What if Microsoft was efficient?

Relative to the amount of money it could make, it would only take a relatively small team of developers and R&D teams (in a perfect world). How many teams of managers etc does it really take? Think of the amount of money that would make. Think of the money businesses would save not having IT support teams etc.

But the fact is, Microsoft aren't the bad guys.

These guys employee countless numbers of people. Around the world, Think of all the products that every business needs that Microsoft ressellers profit out of. How many IT support staff are fed by microsofts hand.

Personally i think Microsoft are doing a good job of sharing the wealth.

Yeah, but in this country, it's corporate (not governmental) malevolence that is the problem.

Any company should be wary about hiring someone who has a history of airing their dirty laundry in public.

Attitudes like yours, while not uncommon, are the reason companies are able to pull so much unethical shit. People are afraid to speak up because they're worried about what will happen to them in the future.

If companies don't want to be disparaged by ex-employees, they should treat them well. And if things get to a point where someone decent still needs to be fired, they should write a severance contract. If you fire good employees without severance, you deserve to have your name dragged through the mud. If you're completely cash-strapped and can't afford a severance check, at least have the decency to (a) write a good reference, and (b) not contest the person's unemployment.

The truth is that if you want to, you can create change, even in large companies like Microsoft, and even without being in a management position. Most people are simply too impatient and not willing to do the work.

Ha! Not so. Important change steps on the toes of people who are entrenched and powerful. Always. Sure, you can clean up a few desks, but real change is just hard to push through.

It takes time to build influence and figure out what has to be said in public vs in private.

Right or wrong, many people find white-collar social climbing to be disgusting and slimy. One could argue that this attitude reflects defensive dismissal or "sour grapes" (i.e. because people aren't good at it, they decry it as an immoral mode of combat) but I think there is some valor in that attitude, nonetheless. Ideally, decisions should be made based on whether they are right or wrong, not based on political extrinsics.

When I've decided to move on, I've always made sure to send my manager an email describing what I think the company was doing right, what it was doing wrong, and what made me decide it was time to leave.

I've never seen that have any kind of effect. In fact, when leaving a company is the time when I'd be least inclined to try to "help" it, because I have no reason to care anymore, and because a departing employee has no credibility anyway.