Right. while I don't wish to argue more, Amazon or for that matter any other big tech is not a homogenous sample. There are bound to Band-Aids and failures to some degree. To form a relative opinion takes experience and number of years in service. From your discontent I can say for sure, you have not been a successful leader so far, and probably still new to Amazon.(blue badge)
True Amazonian culture is prevalent in established teams and older folks. Much of the last few years we have been *excuse my french* attracting sub par but entitled talent that easily grows bitter and wants to jump to google/Facebook from day 1. It's not a bad thing to do, career ladders do exist for a reason and you are correct to chase the money. And holding half baked opinions hardly does any one any good.
Amazon is too big to slow down if you don't like the way it treated you.
You are independent to pursue other employees if they bring more bang for you skills.
It's not about money, career ladders, entitlement, "the way it treated" me, and certainly not Google/Facebook which are, respectively, just as bad and embarrassingly worse. I've been in the industry a while and experienced other technical cultures. Amazon is not special. Particularly, it's not "too big" to be any different from any other +200 2PT tech company as far as technical culture goes.
It's about standards for professional conduct and practice. The shit we do is just not up to standard—even if no other FAAFUEKAVFJXMQIWYENG is either. It's shameful. It's one thing to argue the mess is inevitable because of business and historical reasons, but quite another to take pride in a technical tarpit, even leaving aside the pathetic politics and the unhealthy, burnout-guaranteed pace.
There are BETTER companies that have avoided many if not most of the problems in our culture and technology. They have had the benefit of hindsight, and have made conscious efforts not to fall for the same traps as Amazon, and it works. Amazonians like to pretend they either don't exist or couldn't function at the same scale or pace, but it's bullshit, because they function just fine at the scale and pace that Amazon had at some point in its past when things were even worse technically and culturally.
This has nothing to do with TC, ego or prestige. This has everything to do with management style, technical churn, bureaucratic overhead, and the agility to innovate, iterate and deprecate. Why does it take so much effort to spin up a new service and have operational readiness and all the needed approvals, when at other companies a higher bar can be met in a tenth of the time? Why do you even think this is acceptable or normal?
It depends on how you measure the prestige. If it is based on the quality of hiring, I would say Amazon hiring bar is super low and amazon’s treatment towards their employees is jack shit!!! Otherwise it depends on the individual comp (you will definitely get a higher comp in amazon since you are changing companies) and the team. Regarding the brand value (perceived by people in general), Apple definitely tops Amazon. But that’s definitely a bull shit metric. On an overall, I consider (hiring bar && comp) as a better metric to measure prestige. So, its all about how you define the metric.