Which companies you know about that have a great interview process?

I think this can vary greatly even within the same company. Even if the process is the same, the person providing the subjective rating of the applicant can be radically different from interviewer to interviewer.

I've seen this in the internal posting processes of my company. Probably the most insane interview from a technical perspective was this one time that I was looking to change stacks, a day before my interview HR sent me an email saying it would be a code screening interview and that I should bring my laptop and use any language I wanted. When I got there the next day, the manager handed me a Mac (I'm not familiar with them) and told me that I would be using that and writing Angular code in Webstorm (a language I never used, in an editor I never used). I was given one hour to create a basic webpage containing a table with some data - 30 minutes for functionality, a check of my functionality, then 30 minutes for CSS. I managed to Google how to create an Angular project in Webstorm, a couple shortcut keys on Mac, and get about a quarter of the table built in 30 minutes. When the manager checked my progress he asked if I wanted to do the CSS part or go onto questions, so we did some questions. When he ask if I had any questions, I asked why he even selected me for a code screen if my resume didn't list any of the technologies and that I was switching stacks and expected more of a generic code screen like HR told me. His reply was that he expected me to be an "expert in the technology" (this was a midlevel interview). Needless to say, I did not get the job or the follow up interview.

I recently interviewed for both Shopify and Hashicorp. Their technical assessment were clear, not tricky and allowed for any tools or documentation. The recruiters also explained what to expect at each stages and how to prepare. I didn’t make it through either but it didn’t leave a bitter taste in my mouth.

I have changed the job recently, and I did a few interviews. I enjoyed pair programming and code review that some of them did. Especially that this is something a software engineer, does daily as opposed to implementing complex algorithms, it felt more like I am being tested on skills that are required.

One of the companies, most interactive, did a bit of role-playing. Interviewers took on the roles of product owner and my teammate to help with code if needed. They provided a simple code base with REST API, and I had to implement new endpoint and later there was "change in requirements". I had to refactor the code a bit. Tasks were simple but stimulated a lot of conversations about how and why allowing to cover a wide range of concepts.

Two companies said "pair programming", but in reality, it was me writing code for tasks they wrote down for me without much interaction. Interviewers were mostly silently watching me with occasional nudge if they saw me struggle at some point. But still better than whiteboard :)

One company provided me with a task to solve, and I had a few minutes to read it and ask them questions if any. They left me for an hour to implement it. I don't think they expect anyone to 100% solve the tasks, but I'm sure it could be done in that time frame if you are fluent in tools best suited for it. After one hour, they came back, checked my progress, asked questions about decisions I made and followed up with a conversation on how I would continue and implement remaining parts.

Code review, I was presented with one page of code, nothing complex, but there were either some bugs or code had a questionable quality. We had a conversation about what I think should be changed and why.

I know you asked for company names but I think if you job hunting just ask for a details of the process on first contact. They usually provide it anyway and see if they do things you like and cut it short if they have some things you don't like. I just wanted to share that if the have pair programming and code review in the process they may have a good process.

I interviewed with Ludeon, the company that makes Rimworld. The process was fair. It starts off with slow, light questions like on the game itself, general game design.

Technical interviews were lots of small questions like the definition of X, where X is something common, like threads or classes for example, or the difference between an array or list. Those aren't the exact questions, but it's not jargon, and if you used it, you would know. There were enough questions to sort of test if you were the type of person to look into improving yourself, but not so few questions that it unfairly judges you for missing a few.

The algorithm one was really good. Instead of something generic like pathfinding, it covered how to solve an actual problem that they faced.

I work for a giant corporation and every team is free to interview candidates however they want (after they get past HR screening, which is simple): the (to-be) direct manager of the person is responsible for everything, and generally they make the most senior members of the team do technical interviews, while they do the non-technical part. So your experience will greatly vary.

I interviewed with Helpshift last year and it was a good experience, they did have a take home task but it was very interesting and kind of fun to implement.

The onsite interviews ranged from solving real world problems to optimising data structures.

The interviews also seemed more like open discussions which I rather liked.

I went through the Netflix process and even though it was lengthy it was pretty good IMO. No crazy questions and a good balance between technical and behavioral questions. I'm aware it varies a lot between teams but it looks like they are trying to have a basic structure at least.

Stripe's interview process was really enjoyable. Professional and was relevant to the role.