Fever Software Engineer Interview Questions
& Process

It was a long and demanding process, with unrealistic expectations and poor feedback. It took over a month and a half and many hours of work, only to receive a final offer much lower than initially agreed upon, despite very good feedback. The process is as described in other comments: 1 - HR Interview: the focus isn't on you, but on the company. They sell it as the best thing ever. 2 - Take-home technical test: they say it takes ~4 hours, but for a minimum of quality and to not get discarded, you need between 10 and 20 hours. 3 - Technical Interview: they'll look for the smallest flaw in your practice, no matter how well done it is. They'll also ask tricky questions (e.g., how a specific function of their database engine works internally or how you would improve their infrastructure latency for another continent). It's very difficult to know this unless you've solved exactly those problems; it seems designed for you not to answer and then use it as negative feedback. 4 - Engineering Manager Interview: they review your entire career. 5 - Feedback and offer call: the feedback was non-existent; I had to ask for it by email. The offer was 20% less than what was discussed in the first interview. Although the positive feedback acknowledged deep technical knowledge, they downgraded me to "mid-level" saying my database and infrastructure knowledge is basic, based on those tricky questions. Almost a month and a half and many hours of work for this: an absolute waste of time. If you don't mind wasting time, it's a good process for practicing interviews, but don't be surprised by the final offer, because it's going to be disappointing.

The interview process was quite slow and not very agile. It started with a recruiter call, where the recruiter was really nice. Then there was an interview with the Engineering Manager, who was also friendly, but the conversation felt a bit routine and didn't offer much insight into the product or answers to my questions. After that, there was a technical test that took 72 hours to complete. The instructions were poorly written in English and very vague about what needed to be done, leaving it too open-ended. This felt like a trap to argue later that the solution was either overcomplicated or too simple. The defense stage that followed was long and tedious. They presented real-life issues they encounter, which could be seen as enriching, but it also felt like they were deliberately making things complicated to find minor reasons to disqualify candidates. Overall, the interview process seems overengineered for the actual job tasks. By the way, they don't have a QA process and heavily rely on 'ownership,' meaning the developer is fully responsible for issues until they go to production.

The process was for a remote role based in Argentina. It was the most reasonable process I went through in 4 months. First, a recruiter call, which was a pleasant chat. Then, a take-home exercise that was reasonable and doable within the timeframe. It took me less than 5 days, working after hours. The second interview involved reviewing the exercise, discussing potential improvements, and exploring how I would change things, including pros and cons. After that, a system design interview, again progressively increasing in complexity. This was with two engineers, and it felt very collaborative, like working with colleagues rather than being judged. We discussed everything, including disagreements. The third interview was with a manager, and despite being with management, it was quite technical, covering my experience, problems I've faced, and challenges. The final interview was to discuss the offer.