The first tech round focused on topics like the Android Framework, Reactive Programming, and Jetpack Compose core concepts along with discussions around your thought process and problem-solving approach. The second tech round wasn’t just about Android skills; it also evaluated how you approach problems, manage your time, and present your work. Their evaluation criteria felt real and fair not a robotic or overly theoretical process.

How Recyclerview works internally Drawing custom views and their process How garbage collector works internally A lot of questions on Dependency injection, Kotlin Coroutines Proguard and obfuscation I found the interview structure somewhat inconsistent, with questions that seemed to lack a clear focus or pattern. It would be more effective to streamline the process with well-prepared, relevant questions rather than delving into unrelated or outdated topics. For example, questions regarding RecyclerView felt a bit disconnected from the current Android development landscape. Given that Jetpack Compose has become the preferred UI framework for Android, it would be more beneficial to focus on modern technologies that reflect today’s best practices. Additionally, I believe interviews should assess how a candidate’s expertise can enhance the team and tech stack, rather than focusing too heavily on areas that may not be as applicable to the current environment, such as deep knowledge of custom views. I also observed that when I inquired about the use of Mapbox APK in certain screens and the company's upcoming feature plans, the interviewers were unable to provide clear answers. This raised some concerns regarding the company's strategic planning and its vision for the future. (quarterly and yearly plans) In summary, my experience was very mixed. I appreciated the opportunity to interview, but I believe there’s heavy room for improvement in terms of interview clarity and relevance to modern Android development practices.