My main problem with this is he's dropping a platform that isn't a walled garden (the Mac) to protest walled gardens. By doing that he's making Apple more likely to abandon the one platform they have that isn't a walled garden in the future
It seems to me the better strategy would be to support the Mac until Apple tries to control Mac software development in the same way they do iOS development and then go to Linux. That way Apple can clearly see that people are rejecting the walled garden philosophy.
I was actually disappointed to learn that his move was a political one. He started really great with "My strategy is to use what works best, period." That should have been the best reason to switch. It was, in my case: playing with random OSS projects is much easier on Linux because most often it's the #1 target platform for software I'm interested in.
Speaking of "use what works best": I still have the MBP to run Photoshop, precisely for that reason.
I'm pretty sure most early Linux adopters switched from whatever proprietary platform they were using for political reasons (i.e. freedom). I'd argue that without the people who switched for political reasons, Linux would never have acquired its current level of awesomeness.
"Playing with random OSS projects is much easier on Linux"
I couldn't agree more. I am primarily a .NET/Windows programmer, but I have an Ubuntu VM that I have been using to hack on OSS-based work I've been doing recently. Package managers make it super simple to get everything up and running quickly, and mean I can keep each of my machine's VMs up to date with whatever new thing I'm mucking around with.
He made the specific claim in the article that he believes the cost of switching operating systems escalates with time; if he sees it as inevitable that OSX will go walled, it's reasonable for him to cut his losses now.
I don't necessarily agree with him that OSX will inevitably go walled, but given that belief his behavior is sensible.
he believes the cost of switching operating systems escalates with time
Where's the evidence for that?
Desktop OS behavior has been converging for years. Linux gradually gets more and more features that were formerly restricted to proprietary systems (e.g. iPod compatibility). Emulators have gotten better. The hardware has converged: Everything runs on Intel now. The OS has converged: Everything runs with Unix underneath now. The browsers have converged: there's Webkit browsers for Mac, and Webkit browsers for Linux.
What makes it harder to move from Mac to Linux (or vice versa) than it was, say, three years ago, or five years ago?
What I really don't understand is how you can simultaneously argue that Apple isn't going to continue introducing new Mac OS features and that Mac OS is going to get increasingly hard to migrate away from. Stationary targets are easy to hit. It's moving targets that are difficult to track.
I think you're underestimating the effect of habit. As you work in an environment and become comfortable with it, you develop a workflow that supports that work. The longer you spend in a given environment, the more difficult it is when you finally do switch and have to relearn fundamental things.
Fortunately for those switching from Mac to Linux, several people have made the switch already (or use both simultaneously) and have written free software to mimic much of the functionality they came to expect with Mac and missed in Linux.
I won't pretend to know what the author was thinking, but one obvious answer is that the central authority approach makes data lock-in a whole lot easier.
Is there actually evidence for increasing data lock-in though? It seems to me that we’re all using compatible and often openly standardized formats for the files we create/consume on our local machines slightly more often than in the past, or else are storing data in web apps, where it’s accessible from any platform with a browser.
I think his worry is that Apple will extend their control over what software can be installed from the iphone/ipad/itouch realm to their PCs. That would dramatically increase the cost of switching.
The optimal time to switch would be after Apple announces OS X Evil Empire Edition, but before they ship it. Switching earlier (as Gillmor is doing) has no benefit.
This reminds me of a Grigori Perelman quote (the guy who turned down the Fields Medal and the Millennium Prize on principal):
"There are many mathematicians who are more or less honest. But almost all of them are conformists. They are more or less honest, but they tolerate those who are not honest.”
Apple not only "tolerates" walled-gardens, they build them and encourage others to do so. That is enough reason to not use a Mac.
Or perhaps, more to the point he could keep the MacBook but drop the iPhone (assuming he hasn't already.)
However, one good reason he has to move now as opposed to later, is that later might be too late. Moving to a new platform can be costly and difficult and Linux can be trickier than most to pick up. He might want to have more experience with it when the time comes to drop Mac entirely if that's his goal.
This guy sounds like quite the martyr if he is indeed leaving the platform he's been using for more than a decade on political grounds. I think he's either lying to try and stir up a response from Apple or he's that crazy. Linux isn't easy to get into, but going from one platform to any other is going to take a lot of effort.
I moved into Linux from a background in Windows. The way I did it was to start by gradually replacing the proprietary Windows applications I was using with FOSS equivalents that had good cross-platform support.
The next step was to install Ubuntu as a dual-boot onto my secondary computer and play around with it. I quickly determined that it was considerably easier to do most of the things I do on computers under Ubuntu than it was under Windows. Going back to my primary OS came to feel more and more like returning to prison after a weekend pass.
When it came time to replace my main PC, I bought a new box with no OS and installed Ubuntu as my primary system. Migrating my data was painless, since it was all stored in open formats by this time (moving my email was particularly nice - I just grabbed my Thunderbird profile and dragged it across to the new computer).
The final test was my wife, who is not that interested in technology and just wants the computer to work. The transition was painless for her, since she could use all the same applications on the new computer that she had been accustomed to using on the old.
It seems to me the better strategy would be to support the Mac until Apple tries to control Mac software development in the same way they do iOS development and then go to Linux. That way Apple can clearly see that people are rejecting the walled garden philosophy.