Asking for a Linux (or non-Windows) laptop during a job interview?
I'm interviewing for a software dev job currently (it's in the initial stages). If things work out, I'd absolutely prefer a work laptop with Linux installed (I personally use PopOS but any distro will do), a Mac will be second choice, but I absolutely cannot tolerate Windows, I abhor it, I hate it... (If all computers left on earth have Windows I'd either quit this field or just quit Earth).
Sometimes it's possible to tell if they use Windows or not, for example, jobs with dotnet/C# are most likely using windows, but not in my case.
Anyways, is it too weird to ask what kind of laptop they provide to their employees? And to also specifically ask for a Linux (or anything but windows) work laptop?
A job interview isn't just for the company to find out if you are a good hire for them. It's also for you to find out if the company is a good employer for you.
So yes, ask away. And if they cannot meet your criteria you just don't start working there.
Much like with dating, showing you have some standards and aren't just desperate for the first thing that comes along makes you a lot more attractive. If I was interviewing candidates and one of them respectfully voiced a preference for a certain OS laptop during the interview, I would probably look more favourably on them than someone who didn't voice a preference, all else being equal.
Honestly its best if you say "I prefer Linux but I can be flexible with environments" although in a interview you probably have more important things to show.
Exactly this. There are some things I usually ask about every interview that kind of shows my hand about what I’m looking for, but also forces them to either answer me, or eliminate themselves as candidates in my mind.
However it’s important to note that this only holds true when you’re an in demand sector, where you aren’t an easily replaceable token. Otherwise they can just skip over you as too much potential trouble lol
I don't know about that. During my job interview, I requested that (with the necessary politeness) and it wasn't weird. I accepted the offer and now work daily on a GNU+Linux machine. It's nice.
I'd enquire during the interview and request when accepting the offer (or during onboarding). Don't ask me for a laptop while I'm still interviewing. It's an interview. I'm not giving you shit.
It's a normal thing to ask in an interview, I ask the same every time, so far I've always gotten one, after all most things I work with require Windows machine to have WSL anyways, so might as well cut one layer.
That being said it all comes down to how you ask it and how valuable you are, if a junior said "I only work with Linux, either you give me a Linux box or I won't take the job" you might be cut from the race by HR before any person who even understands what you're asking gets to see you because you're being inflexible. If on the other hand you're a senior and go through the interview and at the end when you get to the questions ask what's the policy for OS on work machines, you're much more likely to get the answer you're looking for. That is unless you're working for a Windows specific program, which obviously will need a Windows box, and not many companies are willing to give you two PCs.
For sure, in fact I do have a Windows box besides my main Linux laptop from the company I work for. But this is because I work most of the time with Linux but there's one specific thing that needs to be done on a Windows box. Luckily for me they have been very accommodating in that regard, but I could see a different company saying I would only get a Windows machine since it can do all of the flows.
You should ask this, but maybe hold back on the "I abhor it" stuff.
While for some places it may even be a good sign you want Linux, serious rejection for other platforms may look like a lack of flexibility. Who's to say you don't have the same strong feelings about other stuff?
IMO generally be a positive about Linux rather than negative about Windows. Asking about what systems they support is reasonable though. Just know that you may be passing up jobs if this is your hill to die on.
It's not weird, you can ask the recruiter or even the developer doing the interview what is the work environment (i.e. at the end, "do you have any question for me"). It's a perfectly valid question.
You don't have to go into details and go into a flamewar about Windows, at most just mention that it's not your preference.
I think it's better to avoid talking about how you "absolutely cannot tolerate", "hate" a given platform because that in itself could be a red flag to some interviewers. If you feel this way about Windows, maybe you'll feel this way about frameworks/libraries that has already been picked and be a pain to work with.
I personally got hired recently, and did ask this in one of the interviews, and luckily we can choose which OS we get to run on the machines. However only those with Windows get IT support if needed. Which I guess is fair.. Hope you get your wishes fulfilled!
I'm not a software developer, but I absolutely do coding and one of the standard questions I ask is what OS they run on official company approved laptops. Other then a shitty bank I worked at for a few years (bad idea, but at least I got a pension out of it), all of them allow windows, osx, and at least one flavor of linux. If they don't allow that stuff, you should just turn down the offer anyway.
You should use whatever the majority of the team is using. If you want to use Linux then you need to make it a priority to find a team that has at least a few people using it. You don't want to be the only person having issues setting up their local dev environment.
I usually ask after the interview and after i've received the offer. At that point it doesn't impact the selection process and you are still in time to reject if you want.
I ask before I take the interview. Location, salary range, linux laptop are prerequisites to me working for anyone. If they punt on the laptop question it means no and they are hoping you'll want the job even without. I can promise you I won't, and if you view that as a red flag I can promise I don't want to work there so I don't care.
If its a hard requirement for you just say that and say that's for workflow and you don't want to waste anyone's time
It is absolutely not weird and I would argue it's even important. The whole point of the interview is that BOTH parties evaluate each other according to THEIR criteria. Maybe for them it is not important but for you it's a requirement, maybe you discover through that the culture is not aligned. It's great for both to understand this NOW rather than 3 months down the line, as you started to settle, they teach you everything about their specific infrastructure and... it doesn't work, now both needs to redo the process again.
So yes IMHO it doesn't matter how "silly" it might sound to you, now during the interview process, is the time to insure that it's going to be an actual fit.
You have to also be aware that they might say no, or that the question itself might lead to a rejection. They might just not want this due to internal policy, security, culture, belief system, etc. This might feel like a loss but again, better know now and look for a place that match your needs that later on.
I also don't conduct many interviews, especially not right now, but when I did anything that could help me understand what made the candidate tick, what got them genuinely excited or angry, was super important. Sure I wanted to insure the technical capability but beyond that I was looking for any clue to see if we were compatible beyond just task in, result out, because in the long run that's what would make us both happy.
Rider works pretty well also if you're allowed to put add Linux support to projects. The Edit and Continue is not as nice though, even though support for it on Linux got merged into dotnet 8.
Last 3 jobs I've worked at, I made it sure they understood I needed a Linux laptop to work. They all offered MacBooks (and I made the mistake of taking the MacBook once), but as long as it's a good company (i.e. no removed IT department) they'll allow it
You wanna go for start-ups then. Most bigger and medium-sized companies have centrally-managed security where they wanna push updates and such to all computers or there's some corporate spyware everyone's gotta run or they've got everyone on M$ Office etc etc. Odds are a place that lets you use a linux laptop is going to be reluctant to buy you one and invite you to use your own. Macbooks aren't so bad, if they let you have sudo, lots of places use those.
I wouldn’t work a windows exclusive job, it’s a deal breaker for me, so I’d definitely ask. I work in an all Mac shop that does enterprise cloud architecture.
I would not ask at the interview.. I’d wait until after you’re hired…
I’m not a programmer; but a system administrator. 4 Linux and 250 windows 1 Mac; In our org. I’ve run off a MBP for 17 years now. And not had any push back when I requested it, just said I’d prefer a then 15” now 16” MBP.
I assume MBP is short for the Mac book pro. Anyway I personally wouldn't be the first person to want a Mac as they don't have all the great of virtualization support.
It does what I need to do my job. I’ve got all the terminal tools. SSH ping nmap. MS makes a great Remote Desktop app
And the built in screen sharing works great for VNC. SO. YEAH
Kind of unrelated but what do you like about MacOS and Linux versus Windows? I mean that in the way of things they share
I never really used a MacOS device for an extended period of time so when I did use one the differences between it and Windows/Linux really slowed me down and confused me.
As a Linux user, you can pretend the os x is just Linux. That's not true, but you can make it work with brew, some googling and your favourite ide / tech stack.
On the plus side, macs are less problematic to integrate with corporate software. You can run commercial software that's not available for Linux.
Windows is just Windows. A step back from either Linux or mac. Two steps backed when managed by corporate IT.
As a Linux user, you can pretend the os x is just Linux. That’s not true, but you can make it work with brew, some googling and your favourite ide / tech stack.
You can, but it's still a miserable experience because the GUI is opinionated and its opinion is shit. I've been on that boat for three years now.
Most jobs I've had in the last 15 years have asked me if I want a Max or Windows PC. I've had Linux boxes at most of them as well, but not as the primary machine.
Why don't you just state your preference is Linux? I wouldn't worry about it to much until you get though the job screening process but if they are getting close to offering you the job it can't hurt to state your preference. Don't be demanding of course.
Even in an IT job I prefer using my own gear (laptop+keyboard+mouse). Corporate laptops (+ peripherals) almost always universally suck. Therfore I won't accept a job unless they have a decent BYOD scheme. At my current workplace for instance, most of our core apps are cloud-based already, and for the few legacy apps, we can access via Citrix; plus they also reimburse me (to an extent) for using my own laptop, which is nice. With my own gear, I can spec it however I want and use my own favorite apps, without needing to go thru approvals and red tape, and more importantly - I can use my own distro/DE of choice. Like, imagine if a company offered Linux laptops, but you were forced to use Ubuntu or something worse like Oracle Linux... So yea, BYOD FTW.
@flakpanzer@lemmy.world if I were you, I'd ask if BYOD is an option, and if so what their BYOD scheme is like. As a Linux person, it's always better to use your own gear, than whatever el cheapo locked-down system the company offers.
FWIW I get along pretty well with a virtualbox vm running on my employer provided windows machine. Performance is good and virtualbox even supports multiple displays pretty well.
You do need to square things with corporate IT and security though. Some places really lock their systems down. I'd ask about how "developer friendly" their security policies are.
Virtual box is very slow compared to something more native. I prefer KVM on Linux if I can get it and I'm pretty sure Hyper-V is going to be faster even though it is a tremendous pain in the ***
VirtualBox performs just fine for me and I'm not exactly light on how I use it. I have a development environment with multiple IntelliJ instances running, and Oracle database running in Docker, etc. And the desktop integration is much better than Hyper-V. KVM is not an option if the host is Windows.
With VirtualBox I can run full screen with multiple monitors - aside from the Windows Key being caught by Windows it's nearly complete immersion to the Linux desktop. I can then switch to "window mode" if I need to do anything from Windows. And even in "windowed mode" I still have multiple monitors (it does one window for each).
Raw performance isn't everything. The user experience here is much better than what the hypervisors provide.
If the laptop I want is more expensive that a MacBook its because it has some serious hardware or very specialized feature set. If you want an average spec machine save the money and just get it instead of MacBook
The Apple M_ processors are great for performance to power usage ratio (and peak performance in general), so a MacBook is a good choice of laptop (even to run Linux on it).
Dell offers their Precision lineup of laptops with an option to ship with Linux (ubuntu) instead of Windows. As far as mainstream, enterprise support and driver updates go, you can't get any bigger than Dell. Lots of good deals to be had on eBay for these machines too, they're built like tanks and driver issues are never a thing.