« V for Vendetta | Main | Random Picks »
April 16, 2006
Analysis Paralysis
I've got another conversation with Microsoft on Tuesday - I've already told the recruiter that I can't imagine what they could say to make them more interesting than the two front-runners , but they want to talk, so I'm willing to listen.
In the mean time, I'm stressing out big time over the decision. If I hadn't talked to both of them, either one of them would "clearly" be the right answer out of the conversations I've had. But I have talked to both of them, and I can't decide which of the two "right" answers is "righter."
Looking at the folks at the start-up , there are some really bright folks there - like the guy responsible for the first IP-enabled coffee pot (Quentin Stafford-Fraser). I've had a couple conversations with Adam and Claes-Fredrik (the two on-board tech guys) and we get along pretty well.
The commute is great (10 minute walk to the ferry), the company is incredibly stable for a start-up, and it might - just might - actually change the world. I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the vision and turning it into actionable parts. I know there some commerce stuff (I'd rather avoid it), some community stuff (could be more interesting, but doesn't immediately thrill me), search stuff (passionately undecided), personalization/profile management (again, undecided), and client work (given the number of mac's around the office, probably both Win32 and OS X) -- but that's as far as I can see.
From an organization perspective, they seem to want to be a lot like the game company when they grow up. Flat, enlightened anarchy. The start-up lottery (I could get rich) is offset by a very interesting stock-option buy back clause in the option grant language -- essentially, the top chunk of your options are up for buy-back at a fixed price to a foundation who's going to do something "good" with them - like buy a bunch of virgin forest and protect it in perpetuity.
There's also the fact that more than one ex-Real employee has joined them, which means (a) it's a handful of people I already know but that (b) there may be complications (i.e. Real may throw a gasket).
As contrast, I just read through the people list at the game company. I'd be the only developer without a background in writing games (guess everyone has to start), and I worry about how I'll fit into the culture. The commute is manageable - though I'll be questioning my sanity on the handful of really nasty days we get every winter (assuming I can't just work from home). And the bus isn't an option - being on the 8am boat and taking the bus means I'd arrive at the office around 10:30. Unreasonable.
The Win32 angle sorta worries me -- every time I touch Windows these days I get frustrated at it, and there's no hiding from Windows in that company.
The tech interview (my head-planting on the code "stuff") is still worrying me. Actually, what's worrying me is the handshake deal that basically says if I can't get "back on the horse," it all comes crashing down in December - which is exactly the wrong time (our 10 year anniversary). I'm not saying it's likely to happen, just that I'm conscious of it.
The work hours are probably similar - the established company has ship cycles, the start-up has a measurable run-way. It'll average around 45-50 hours/week.
They both seem like really good opportunities, and I'm just having a hell of a time making a decision...
Of course, it doesn't help that I'm stressing out about giving notice at Real - I don't know how my team's going to take it, I don't know if the exec staff (i.e. Rob) will decide to turn it into a federal case, or if there will be a concerted effort to change my mind. I know my departure will make things more difficult for Edmond and Brian in the short term (just due to the lack of someone to manage the chunk of mess I've been managing), but I don't know if it will make things difficult for them in other ways as well.
Posted by dberger at April 16, 2006 5:08 PM