Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Software Engineering at Google (2020)

abseil.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 352 posts

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#91

Post by jefftk »

drewg123 wrote: post #46
mushufasa wrote: post #4

Cool. Could someone, maybe an ex-googler, comment on which parts of these work well and which don't? A lot of other companies get into trouble trying to cargo-cult what Google does when they are operating in very different environments wherein those practices aren't optimal. E.g. different levels of scale. Additionally, critics of Google may point out that their engineering culture may not be great on its own terms -…

"Readability" works terribly when your company is acquired and your team enters all at the same time. Google has (or had ~10 years ago), a thing called "readability" for each language, where in order to be allowed to commit code to the central "google3" repo, you needed to have written some large amount of code in that language, and needed to have a readability reviewer sign off on your code. The process is designed…

The way it's supposed to work is that acquired teams get lots of support on integration, including readability. This helps your team get integrated into writing Google-style code. Not sure why that didn't work out in this case?

(Left Google a year ago)

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#92

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

outside1234 wrote: post #30
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Additionally, critics of Google may point out that their engineering culture may not be great on its own terms -- every time Google launches a new feature, people post links to the Google product graveyard. It is personally scary when they develop new products. What if it is a brilliant idea, one I cannot live without? If Google develops it, then I am looking at this stillborn thing, mewling for life when I know it…

The inventions are to keep the talent stream coming ... to work on ads. The inventions are the small tax they pay to pretend to candidates that they could work on inventions when the vast majority of them will be "allocated" to ads.

You're telling me this stupid, bizarre thing: that Google's major innovation was an HR process.

That's fucked-in-the-head just enough that you've made me wonder if it's true.

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#93

Post by NetOpWibby »

lapcat wrote: post #18
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has undergone a similar ossification. I think it's just something that happens to companies that get a certain size. The Process becomes more important than the Product. When I was younger, I wanted so badly, to work at Apple. A few years ago, they actually approached me, and I found out that the culture seems to have drastically changed. They ended up not wanting me anyway, so maybe it's just sour grapes, on m…

> I found out that the culture seems to have drastically changed. Can you explain in detail?

Steve isn't there, for one.

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#94

Post by dinvlad »

jeffbee wrote: post #61
MarceColl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tools, design and manpower needed to build a skyscraper are different from those needed to build a 1-story wood house. It's not that the ones that build the wood house are failing to study and adopt the ways of their extremely successful competitors. Now, some of the things you say like unit-testing and user data encryption are ones that I've never seen associated with the "We're not google" mindset, so maybe peo…

I'm not really talking about artisanal 3-man software shops, I'm talking about mid-sized companies with thousands of engineers, who don't realize they are already larger than and facing the same problems as Google was when they started adopting these practices. And to be clear, rejecting something as proven as pre-commit code review is not only to reject the example of Google and many other very successful enterprise…

Curious how pre-commit code review worked, could you please elaborate a bit?

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#96

Post by biztos »

foldr wrote: post #33
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has undergone a similar ossification. I think it's just something that happens to companies that get a certain size. The Process becomes more important than the Product. When I was younger, I wanted so badly, to work at Apple. A few years ago, they actually approached me, and I found out that the culture seems to have drastically changed. They ended up not wanting me anyway, so maybe it's just sour grapes, on m…

Has it really? The transition to Apple Silicon was pretty impressive, and something that Apple could have simply decided not to do at all while still remaining hugely profitable. I don't know anything about the company's internal culture, but it's not exactly resting on its laurels just yet.

The hardware people certainly aren't: I think they're reveling in their newfound freedom to make the best, not just the thinnest, computers.

But the software side? There seems to be a massive variance in both ability, and giving-a-shit across the software orgs, and no leadership filter on the output of these disparate groups.

Perhaps they have the opposite of the resting-on-laurels problem: a smattering of very senior people who are talented and care about the product/users, and a wide base of careerists who aren't very good and just want the money and the CV, users be damned.

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#97

Post by londons_explore »

fizigura wrote: post #85
londons_explore wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google search was 1998. Google Maps was 2005. Gmail was 2004. Android was 2008. Youtube was 2005. Chrome was 2008. Docs was 2006. Translate was 2006. Yet in the last decade, they really haven't had many successes (perhaps with the exception of Google Photos - 2015) One would imagine that with nearly 200,000 employees at least one of them would have a good enough idea for a new product people like. But management and…

If you compare the Android from 2008 and the Android from 2023 then you'd soon agree that within these 15 years, the whole thing was re-invented multiple times. And I'm not talking the UX, which has already changed substantially, but I mean the underpinnings.

Sure. But as far as the user is concerned, it is much the same. Touchscreen apps, app store, camera, wifi and phone abilities, app switcher and back button. The user doesn't care that the wheel has been reinvented 3 times along the way... There hasn't been any revolutionary new features in android since shortly after launch really.

There have been revolutions in apps. For example, pre 2017 I couldn't just tap a button and get an Uber. Or tap a button and have food delivered. Or do a video call with all my friends.

But the OS can't really claim credit for most of that innovation.

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#98

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

lapcat wrote: post #18
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has undergone a similar ossification. I think it's just something that happens to companies that get a certain size. The Process becomes more important than the Product. When I was younger, I wanted so badly, to work at Apple. A few years ago, they actually approached me, and I found out that the culture seems to have drastically changed. They ended up not wanting me anyway, so maybe it's just sour grapes, on m…

> I found out that the culture seems to have drastically changed. Can you explain in detail?

I'm not going to go into detail, as I don't think that it's helpful.

But I don't think that someone like me would be very welcome there.

That is both good and bad. I am certainly not God's Gift to Programming, so they may well be better off without folks like me. They certainly seem to be making a lot of green.

Re: Software Engineering at Google (2020)

#99

Post by zirgs »

bluefishinit wrote: post #39

Unless you have a monopoly on the ad market that's going to mask all of your bad managerial, strategy and culture problems, then I'd advise steering well clear of copying Google. They make money in-spite of their day to day practices, not because of them.

Yup - just look at Stadia. This is how they handle stuff that's not related to ads.
Post reply on HN