Great article (loved the individual country lists!) It is fascinating how German engineering students want to work for German companies. Is this a "recruiting" thing -or- a cultural thing or what?
Also am a little dumbfounded by the USA list. NASA #1? Really? No budget...no manned space flight and no real prospects for the future...at least as of now. Also, finding the Air Force on the US list is interesting. Lots of government / defense contractors on this list. This seams to be a sea change in thought...but I haven't seen lists of years past to compare. None of the engineering students I have talked to here in the US say NASA, et. al. They say Google, Apple, IBM, Microsoft so I must be talking to the wrong students :)
All I can think of when seeing these lists is how few companies I even knew of when leaving school. I ended up at a large one as well, but was drawn more by the "big enough to send people to interview on campus" more than the "oh, I think I want to work for _________, inc."
When I was a wee little tadpole fresh out of school, I wanted to go straight for the big name companies of the day, partly out of naive principles to be part of something "larger" than myself. I've since learned some bitter lessons that large companies are like massive ships that are sometimes steered by a drunken captain straight into a lighthouse, and no one on board has any control over their fate. I've worked at both large and small companies, and as far as job quality and satisfaction go, small has beaten big every single time.
Let's go back 40 years. I was in College using a slide rule, then the hand held calculators came out. Texas Instruments and HP were the big names in calculators back then. These corporate names were on every calculator and in the hands of every Engineering student. What advertising! As a result, I had a very successful career at TI. It's no wonder that Google, Microsoft and Apple are near the top of the list this year. Engineering students only know what is fed them...and that's where advertising of big corporate names comes in.
"smaller corps are more stingy, less stable..."
That's funny. I work for a fortune 500 company and I would agree they are more stable due to a global presence, but less stingy...not hardly. We cut travel, office supplies, and SG&A like none other to try to keep a global shareholder base happy. Smaller companies can still throw Catalina Winemixers, while employees at larger companies often trade perks for stability. Kudos to Google though, they will have to start hazing just to thin out the herd of people trying to get in their door. The pressure to perform on senior postions there (knowing there are millions of grads wanting their jobs) must be huge.
Is there a R&D center of Apple In.c in china?
I think there is only sales department in china or some members doing factory quality things in shanghai or shenzhen.
EPA is a government department in china.It's a good choice for graduating students studying environment project in colleage or university.
Good to see a mix of software technology and general engineering companies in the list. I feel that the students outlook is now more broader than the ones from the 90s.
Google is a fun place to work. I would be surprised if people really know what working at Google entails as it appears they are influenced by its pervasive ubiquitousness.
Generally smaller companies give more reign to younger engineers which help them develop faster as compared to their big10 peers.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.