Agree with this. There's a definite stigma with contract-to-hire, at least in my group of tech friends.

No one desires to be in a contract limbo where they aren't sure if they're going to be hired for real or or if they're doing the job search all over again in a few weeks.

Further, as soon as you use contract work to determine hiring criteria -- you've added your management into the mix. Are expectations made clear? Is the person's time managed efficiently? If management fails at any point then it's detrimental to the prospective employee's future, likely not by their own fault.

I don't think many candidates are interested in "immediate" hiring. Most people I know need to take extra time to wait for other offers to come in.

It also gives the candidate a way to see what kind of problems he'd be working with, and the quality of the code-base, working conditions, etc.

I think it's a win-win.

>filtering out a portion of the highest quality candidates

if you're not able to easily spot such a candidate without attempting to make him/her to jump through the gimmicks (brainteasers, contract-to-hire, etc..) - well, it indicates the issue with your company and hiring practices in particular are deeper than just what gimmicks to apply.

Good point. Maybe the best approach would be to let the interviewer choose the approach that works best for them. It would be sooo refreshing for a company to present me with interview options that will showcase my skills the best.