<p>I posted a thread a while back that debated the value of a BS with EECS or a BA with CS, but now that app season is coming up for me I"m re-evaluating which College to apply to (LS or Engineering).</p>
<p>The general consensus was that employers look upon them equally, but looking at the career surveys for UCB got me curious:</p>
<p>The starting salary is pretty much the same (I assume there is a general starting income in the software field) but the EECS grads, most of them as software engineers, are working for the big name companies like Apple, Microsoft, Google, Intel etc. while the CS grads are in the less known companies. </p>
<p>Could any of the informed people in the industry shed some light? Thank you</p>
<p>Some of the less known companies may actually be more desirable to some people, as they are small startups. It is not like those same three to five big companies are the only desirable places to work for a CS graduate (a common misconception on these forums).</p>
<p>As a practical matter, EECS vs. L&S CS does not really make a difference in the CS job market, unless you want to work in a niche area where the ABET accreditation of EECS matters (e.g. patent law).</p>
<p>Sorry about bringing up the comparison discussion again, I have read through all the recent posts about the two but wanted some specific response to the small company v. big company aspect that I noticed-- which ucbalumnus addressed</p>
<p>@ucbalumunus </p>
<p>Thanks for the response-- didn’t see it that way. I see that the salaries appear to be the same, but out of curiosity-- generally, do startups have the same amount of benefits as do the big names?</p>
<p>Yeah, it’s not like there’s anything particularly magical about working for the “big 3” or “big 4” companies compared to the other options out there. I guess there’s bragging rights, if that’s all you’re concerned about. But just to illustrate–a relative of mine got a job with Google working on a project, and it was pretty much her dream job. Then they just shut it down and let her go. The point is, even at a big-name companies you’re going to have the same problems as in any company.</p>
<p>Usually not in terms of insurance type benefits (medical, long term disability, etc.). But the potential for big gains on employee stock or options based benefits is much greater with the startups (though many startups go bust leaving the stock or options worthless).</p>
<p>The small startup work environment is also different from that of a big company; some people just prefer or fit better in one or the other.</p>
<p>And EECS vs. L&S CS really does not matter for most CS jobs at either type of company.</p>
<p>Ah cyoung I guess high overturn rates are universal. Makes me want to get a government job. </p>
<p>Thanks again for helping me out again ucbalumnus. You seem to know a whole a lot about diff industries. Out of curiosity how did you get so informed about these ‘insider’ insights with college programs and the market? You’re really helpful in this community.</p>
<p>As a hiring manager, I couldn’t care less about what department/school the candidate graduated from. As long as (s)he can do the job, who cares?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>It used to be the case that big companies tended to be more stable, and had better benefits. IME, that was 15 years ago.</p>
<p>Not any more. Nowadays many small companies have just as good benefits. In terms of being stable, I think small companies have an advantage. The chance of being laid off is just about the same regardless the size of the company. But in a small company, the information about the company is shared better than in a large company. In other words, you’ll know better if there is a lay-off coming up, and if you are among the ones being let go.</p>
<p>Background info: This November, I’ll have been in the same industry for 30 years. I was laid of twice from large companies (1000+ employees), of which I’d learned of the lay-off on the same day. I was also laid off twice from small companies (less than 20 employees), of which I’d learned of the lay-off 3 months ahead of time, enough for me to start at the new job immediately the day after being laid off.</p>
<p>As far as I know, most EECS concentrate on the CS aspect of EECS and less on the traditional EE topics like circuits, fabrication, controls, etc. so of course the job prospects/salary would be about the same since you studied more or less the same thing.</p>
<p>Silicon Valley is distinctly meritocratic in ways that distinguish it from jobs in many other industries and govt. Heck, high schoolers who have been coding since they were 12 are able to get jobs at Google and Facebook - what matters is your skills and not whether your degree says EECs vs CS. This is even more true for startups, where you see people dropping out of college and being able to get investors to invest in their new company.</p>
<p>ABET accreditation is just a checklist of courses. The only reasons Berkeley L&S does not have ABET accreditation is because Berkeley L&S does not require you to take classes in the core sciences - physics, chemistry, and biology. EECS does require you to take such classes.</p>
<p>In this case, ABET accreditation is only indicative of the fact that EECS is actually more restrictive and less flexible than L&S, in terms of having more requirements.</p>
<p>Ahhh sorry, I meant that since the degree isn’t ABET accredited, would a company overlook it if they saw the university is of high caliber/you took equivalent courses - like a CS degree + physics, math and a few EE, but no formal EECS degree. </p>
<p>Ok…so I guess bottom line would be this only affects the said “niche areas”? What would those be specifically?</p>
<p>And sorry, final question, this doesn’t affect grad school, would it? Like say I wanted to do EECS after this? Would they prefer or require an accredited/B.S. degree?</p>