← Microsoft Interview Insights
Start by clarifying the business goals and technical constraints, then systematically compare the two applications across dimensions like architecture, user base, and feature set. Recommend a path based on evidence, favoring evolution over a full rebuild unless the older system is fundamentally unsustainable. Emphasize incremental migration to minimize risk and deliver value early.
Pro tip: Frame your answer around reducing risk and total cost of ownership, not just technical elegance. Mention that Microsoft values data-driven decisions and customer impact, so tie your recommendation to metrics like user adoption and maintenance costs.
Ask about the business objectives, timeline, budget, and non-negotiables (e.g., compliance, uptime). This ensures your approach aligns with stakeholder priorities.
Compare architecture, code quality, dependencies, feature sets, user bases, and operational costs. Identify strengths, weaknesses, and overlapping functionality.
Consider three paths: evolve the older app, evolve the newer app, or build new. Weigh each against criteria like risk, cost, time-to-market, and long-term maintainability.
Choose the best option based on your analysis, typically evolving the more modern codebase unless the older one has irreplaceable value. Explain trade-offs and mitigation strategies.
Outline a phased approach: start with shared services or low-risk components, use feature flags and A/B testing, and gradually decommission the legacy system.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.