From Dare’s blog, a posit that folks are leaving Google for Microsoft, driven by his anecdotal observations and blog post from a guy named Sergey Solyanik:
So why did I leave?
There are many things about Google that are not great, and merit improvement. There are plenty of silly politics, underperformance, inefficiencies and ineffectiveness, and things that are plain stupid. I will not write about these things here because they are immaterial. I did not leave because of them. No company has achieved the status of the perfect workplace, and no one ever will.
I left because Microsoft turned out to be the right place for me.
First, I love multiple aspects of the software development process. I like engineering, but I love the business aspects no less. I can’t write code for the sake of the technology alone – I need to know that the code is useful for others, and the only way to measure the usefulness is by the amount of money that the people are willing to part with to have access to my work.
Sorry open source fanatics, your world is not for me!
Google software business is divided between producing the “eye candy” – web properties that are designed to amuse and attract people – and the infrastructure required to support them.
I believe it makes sense to read this –
>
sentence only to understand his motivation – $$$.
But actually there is another aspect which I believe plays its role in this situation. I’m familiar with Russian/Ukrainian programmers mentality, for sure there are many of them witch work great in a team and don’t be guided by their own ego, but there are plenty of them which do and I think this Sergie is one of them. I used to work with the Ukrainian Perl developer and boy, it was something….the guy wanted and I believe still wants to Rule the world.
How do I know this matter and can share my opinion about it? Because I’m Ukrainian and spent 8 years of my life in IT here in Ukraine.
Agree with Artyom. It sounds like “they pay me better”. It’s no a shame to find a job worth more money… but saying that “the only way to measure the usefulness is by the amount of money that the people are willing to part with to have access to my work” is plain non-sense. A lot of useful software comes for free, and a lot of that useful software is more useful than costly counterparts.
Anyway, I agree also with Sergey:
“I left because Microsoft turned out to be the right place for me. ”
“Sorry open source fanatics, your world is not for me! ”
He’s perfectly right: if that is his way of thinking, MS is the right place for him, surely not open-source.
It looks like he got his points.
I need to know that the code is useful for others, and the only way to measure the usefulness is by the amount of money that the people are willing to part with to have access to my work.
This sentiment resonates with me.
I think I’ve said it before on this blog a few years ago, but in 1999 I wrote to Google and offered to pay them a monthly service / subscription fee, if they would concentrate on providing me with the best possible service, unfettered and uncluttered by ads.
I was willing to part with my hard-earned cash to pay directly for their work. I was willing to do what this fellow, above, values. But Google never took me up on it, choosing instead to arrest development on certain features, in order to fill the screen with ads, instead.
It’s an interesting question. From the consumer standpoint, which business model provides the best quality / best user experience? One that is ad-supported, or one that is fee/transaction supported?
Does it make a difference to the quality of the final product when the consumer is paying for that product, directly, versus when a 3rd party (the advertiser) is indirectly paying for that product?
There are plenty of ways to value open-source contributions. How many people use the software is one. Another is how many people contribute to the effort. Still another is how many people use the effort as a platform for something else. Let’s not forget the satisfaction some people get from volunteering and/or providing a community service.