No, it's just mocking how goofy and irrelevant they can be sometimes.
See: Software technical interviews.
I had a takehome test for a software position and had to learn their little blog builder architecture some Microsoft goofball wrote to make it "easier to build blogs" for govt entities. If you know anything about software, or more specifically HTML, you'll know that HTML is already easy enough for a blogger to understand and write in, without having to build an esoteric, shiny, niche '(over)architectured' events-based UI system so developers in Dubai and Thailand can have a 'specialized' job that takes a bunch of memorization and reading documentation to understand.
I wrote everything in HTML and had enough time to animate the buttons and provide a beautiful theme using TailwindCSS/Daisy, beautifying the little calendar doohickey they wanted me to create. All I was doing was using fundamentals + a few little utility packages to make the CSS look pretty and toggles work fast, nothing more.
I did not get the job, unfortunately. But I'm glad I don't have to work within such a complicated, pointless architecture.
Any C# developer over mid-level can write an automatic blog page generator and still have time for coffee.
It amazes me how companies make something as simple as a UI complicated. Then they bring it to their interviews.
When I hear "tennis ball in a Tesla" types of questions, I get nervous about the opportunity, because I know they don't know what the heck they're doing on some level.
On the other hand, I've worked at places that DID know what they're doing. They asked me in-depth C# and React questions, rapid fire, and were impressed once they ran out of questions! ^_^
So, the next time I go in for an interview, I'm just going to filter out the tennis balls...
This is actually clueless hiring managers trying to emulate top tech companies which introduced these kind of questions to assert if you can think from the first principles in the situations when facing the problems that don't have readily available answers.
It is not about the result, but about your approach to solving the problem. That said, giving these kind of questions for mundane positions is ridiculous.
don't mess with engineers, man, they can math you right into the middle of next week 😎
2.5 seconds if you run 😂
When, instead of simply saying "a car," they say a Tesla model X... 😏
Is this a common interview question?
No, it's just mocking how goofy and irrelevant they can be sometimes.
See: Software technical interviews.
I had a takehome test for a software position and had to learn their little blog builder architecture some Microsoft goofball wrote to make it "easier to build blogs" for govt entities. If you know anything about software, or more specifically HTML, you'll know that HTML is already easy enough for a blogger to understand and write in, without having to build an esoteric, shiny, niche '(over)architectured' events-based UI system so developers in Dubai and Thailand can have a 'specialized' job that takes a bunch of memorization and reading documentation to understand.
I wrote everything in HTML and had enough time to animate the buttons and provide a beautiful theme using TailwindCSS/Daisy, beautifying the little calendar doohickey they wanted me to create. All I was doing was using fundamentals + a few little utility packages to make the CSS look pretty and toggles work fast, nothing more.
I did not get the job, unfortunately. But I'm glad I don't have to work within such a complicated, pointless architecture.
Any C# developer over mid-level can write an automatic blog page generator and still have time for coffee.
It amazes me how companies make something as simple as a UI complicated. Then they bring it to their interviews.
When I hear "tennis ball in a Tesla" types of questions, I get nervous about the opportunity, because I know they don't know what the heck they're doing on some level.
On the other hand, I've worked at places that DID know what they're doing. They asked me in-depth C# and React questions, rapid fire, and were impressed once they ran out of questions! ^_^
So, the next time I go in for an interview, I'm just going to filter out the tennis balls...
This is actually clueless hiring managers trying to emulate top tech companies which introduced these kind of questions to assert if you can think from the first principles in the situations when facing the problems that don't have readily available answers.
It is not about the result, but about your approach to solving the problem. That said, giving these kind of questions for mundane positions is ridiculous.
Agreed!