> Personally, I'd prefer to give a 1 hour presentation of my work over a full day of technical interviews one after the other. I like this presentation idea - I've only ever seen it done when hiring people with PhDs just out of academia, but I'd like to see it as an option for non-PhD positions as well. This way you get all of the interested parties in the room at one time, they hear your presentation and there's some Q&A afterward and you'd be done in like 90 minutes to 2 hours.
Personally, I wouldn't do either one. I'm fine with multi-stage interviews, even multiple drives to a given location, but there are limits. If a company wants me there for an all-day affair, I better have some compensation on the way, either the job itself or just for the time investment. I'm too damn busy to just flush a day down the toilet on a "maybe we'll hire you," not even going into the travel expenses, arranging time off from my current job, etc.
All my career I have watched as stories from fellow tech workers get more and more ridiculous, the lengths they're expected to go to for a freaking interview. It's gotten disgusting. If a company thinks you're a good fit for their position, they should be ready to court you as well. The only context these death march assembly line interviews make sense in, is if you are utterly meaningless to them, just another cog to be placed, and eventually, replaced. And I don't want to work for anyone like that anyway.