If I were him, and I'm not, I'd want to buy an up-to-date ThinkPad and run native Linux on that as my primary OS... a lot easier than worrying about virtualization.
Then again, since Michael has such a huge variety of hardware, I wonder if he even has a CONCEPT of a "primary OS" -- it must seem ridiculous to think of only one of his computers as being his "main" machine when he must have dozens
FOSS developers have regular conferences to meet in person at least annually. They're able to tackle difficult engineering problems on whiteboards, over beer, etc that otherwise would end in stalemates for months.
Without these things, I agree that working remotely would be isolating and difficult. But if you use the tools that the Internet makes available to you, you can really make it work.
A recent product -- Bioware's Mass Effect 3 -- was produced as a cohesive, coherent game with teams in at least four different locations (that I'm aware of) cooperating together remotely, without frequently meeting in person. Sure, I'm sure they all met one another at some point at a summit or something, but their day to day grunt work was done while coordinating several separate offices. And of course, in order to make a game that is consistent, functional and coherent, they had to communicate a LOT between the offices, so I'm sure they used the latest tech (including Quantum Entanglement devices that create holo-projections ) to keep everyone on the same page.
I think your company (or whoever you're working with on your web development project) is Doing It Wrong (tm). You can't treat a remote worker exactly the same as you'd treat a face to face worker, but doing without the things that you take for granted in person.
That's not acceptable. Instead, you need to recognize the things that you don't have immediately available, and find ways to make those things happen remotely. Hence my suggestions of possible social outlets above, and so on.
I don't understand how the two possible reasons you gave are any justification, either. (1) I don't deal with the devil just because it's pretty, nice, useful, etc. etc. and (2) so just because that OS is not supported well for installation on other hardware (which is a direct consequence of its company's horrible draconian policies and approach), I should use it since the others are freer? How does that promote freedom? How does it promote adoption of Linux when even people who allegedly support it use other operating systems in their every day tasks? Doesn't that make them hypocrites?
Let me quote you something interesting:
I find it really interesting that a free software advocate uses one of the most closed systems in the world to read his mail.Through all of his work he is a Linux and free software advocate with strong support for GNOME, Wayland, PHP, X.Org, Fedora, and Ubuntu, among other projects
Glad you saw through the hypocrisy and warned us!
Ok I probably went a bit too far.. In all seriousness though, do you attack everyone that runs a proprietary OS like this? I really don't see the big deal. Do you use computers at work and occasionally deal with a proprietary OS? How is this different?
2) I'm not going to get into a debate about MacOS being able to be installed on commodity hardware. Are you seriously proposing that only people who exclusively run Linux should be allowed to be advocates for its use? If you go down that path, the user-base of Linux is not going to grow. I've written plenty of open-source code in the last year, and guess what... It runs in Windows, MacOS, and Linux. Just because I prefer to work in Linux, and do for 40 hours/week, doesn't mean that I don't also use the other operating systems available to me.
Honestly, I view MacOS this way: It's a stable *NIX system with a nice GUI that also gives me access to a terminal and everything else that I usually need in Linux. It's easy to support other people (relatives) who use it, and it's a lot more novice friendly than apt-get.
And Ubuntu center is even more novice friendly.Honestly, I view MacOS this way: It's a stable *NIX system with a nice GUI that also gives me access to a terminal and everything else that I usually need in Linux. It's easy to support other people (relatives) who use it, and it's a lot more novice friendly than apt-get.