Google, Amazon topping Microsoft in pay for engineers | Hacker News Reader

Google, Amazon topping Microsoft in pay for engineers

techflash.com

24 pointsmalvosenior21 comments

As an insider I think those numbers also include bonuses for Microsoft numbers at least. And being on the inside we are told we are paid on average more than industry. That may be true at face value but I really think we need to compare ourselves like this post does: to those we directly compete with.

But money is silly. The best thing MS can do is create an environment in which Senior Developers don't leave. But the only way MS knows how to do that is with $$$. Which is not sustainable.

Money pays for the tech toys that so many of us enjoy.

Money pays the bills, of course, and these days, the cost of living can cut a hefty wedge into that money...

TBH, if I can pay the bills, save for retirement, and have a little left for me and my family, I am happy; but the truth is, it's a struggle.

It certainly isn't the only way to keep developers, but I don't see how it's unsustainable. The nature of software development is such that huge margins are possible, and the productivity of a really good Engineer is that of many, many mediocre Engineers.

I remember last time I was working for a large corp, there was this one guy on the team who was really, incredibly good. Easily worth 5x me, in terms of work done. He made 20% more than I did. There was another guy who was probably closer to 1/5th my productivity. He made maybe 20% less than I did.

the thing is, determining productivity is difficult; but I think even allowing for a high margin of error, you could sustainably target only the best, and pay twice what the competition does.

What I meant by unsustainable is that I feel the retaining talent problem is less related to money. My guess is smart people are leaving mostly because of the environment and not because of pay and benefits. When those smart people leave, theoretically the quality of the product suffers and overtime the competitor with better people wins. If MS profits go down over time, and investing in things like Azure and Bing and Entertainment (all which loose money), I don't see how they can continue to throw money at the talent problem. But man if I could get paid more AND work in a better environment (one where I had an impact) I would go for it in a heart beat. So in that sense money DOES matter. I agree with the rest of what you said though about it being difficult to measure.

This is what I think of when the subject is talented people leaving MS: http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2008/12/Key_data_center_arc...

http://googletesting.blogspot.com/2009/06/james-whittaker-jo...

I think Amazon and Google are better because of it.

I agree with you that money isn't everything, and money, if it's just a little, like 10% or something probably doesn't matter much at all for the vast majority of the people.

I do wonder, though, what would happen if microsoft decided to start offering top search engineers from google twice what they are currently getting.

I think they would stay at Google (in its current state). Google is getting big but is still not as big as Microsoft (political). Google has more data (I would imagine that is something search folks want more of). Google seems to be the best environment for top search engineers for a variety of reason. My guess is that the top search folks (along with others in the top of their field) get to choose where they work and what they get paid because they are at the top of their game. So if Microsoft is where they wanted to be they would already be here. If it is where they want to be and they are not shame on us for not recognizing that.

maybe you are right; but personally, one of the big reasons I started my own business was that I saw really, really good people only made 20%-50% more than absolute mediocres, when they were 10-20 times more productive.

If it were possible to make big bucks without starting your own company would I have continued to work for others? maybe.

The thing is, some people say "Once I have enough, it doesn't matter" and certainly, the $100K/year that your average bay area computer person makes is 'enough' to live on... but double that and you will be able to retire in less than half the time. Retire and work on your own terms, if you like.

For me, that is what getting more money is about. I don't really care about having a nicer car or anything, but it sure would be nice to be able to, say, take a year off and travel, and not worry about what employers would think about the year-long gap in my resume.

The Seattle to MountainView comparison is interesting between Google and Microsoft. Consdiering 12% CA income tax, Microsoft pay is higher.

But from experience, Seattle Google and SVC Microsoft are both lower base than the motherships. So the results of the city level comparison can be explained by this factor.

Also, the cost of living in the Bay Area is significantly higher than Seattle; housing alone is a huge factor. Google employees are really paid peanuts compared to Microsoft's:

http://www.city-data.com/city/Seattle-Washington.html

  Estimated median house or condo value in 2008: $491,600 (it was $252,100 in 2000)
  Seattle: 	 $491,600
  Washington: 	 $308,100

  Dec. 2009 cost of living index in Seattle: 126.5 (high, U.S. average is 100)

http://www.city-data.com/city/Mountain-View-California.html

  Estimated median house or condo value in 2008: $755,200 (it was $464,800 in 2000)
  Mountain View:  $755,200
  California: 	 $467,000

  Dec. 2009 cost of living index in Mountain View: 164.0 (very high, U.S. average is 100)

Raw dollars, glassdoor says google pays more. Regionally adjusted, there's a lot more that raw dollars can't account for.

Please link to the article, not to the comments on the article. It's annoying to start halfway down the page.

It might be useful for the article submission page to ask you "Are you sure you're not accidentally linking to the comments section of an article?" when it detects an #anchor in the URL.

I get paid just a little below their averages and I'm not quite the calibre of a Google/MS/Amazon developer. Plus I'm on the east coast in NC where the CoL is definitely cheaper.

Google/MS/Amazon do have some VERY smart developers. But there are dolts too at the big ones. The fact that you realize there are better developers than you puts you above most. A lot at MS think that because they work at MS they are the best thing in the world for software.

Could this be because Google and Amazon promote faster? I ask because my Microsoft offer out of college was more.

Give larger raises with promotions would be my guess. MS likes to promote (expect more) and then give below inflation raises.

Microsoft promotes faster than Amazon since Microsoft uses an internal numerical rating score that can potentially improve each review cycle.

Also, the offers I heard about (from a few years ago) from both companies were comparable with respect to base salary, with negligible differences. However, Amazon's stock-based compensation offers blew Microsoft's (laughable) offer out of the water.

You say "stock-based compensation", I hear "golden handcuffs".

You say "golden handcuffs" and I hear "an employee who doesn't plan on sticking around"

The point of golden handcuffs really is just that; you stick around a while and we'll give you a little extra.

(My problem with golden handcuffs is that most deals I've seen as an Engineer were pathetically small. The employer seemed to be unaware that I can buy stock options on the open market.)

I graduated last year and in general Amazon's offers were above Microsoft's by a fair margin (10% or more).

How do the software companies compare to developer positions in other industries? I am pretty happy with my compensation at a bank :)

In most industries, expect to get less than the software industry as a software engineer. Software is just a lot more important to, say, Microsoft's business than it is at BOC Gases, and they pay proportionately well.

However, that's not necessarily true in every industry, and some industries can pay a premium just because they have good profits and want the best engineers. I wouldn't be surprised if banks paid better on average than the software industry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com