Interestingly enough, I was recently rereading Tog on Interface, published way back in 1992, where he made the exact same point. Many companies assume that they can go through the following three stages (I am paraphrasing here, of course):
1. Make a direct port of their app, with no attempt to be Mac-like.
2. Glue a few Mac features on top of the port.
3. Use the $$$ raised from selling 1 & 2 to do a native Mac version.
Unfortunately, most apps that try that die somewhere in stages one or two, because Mac users want to use Mac Apps. Not ports. I do cross-platform software development (Windows, Linux, and Solaris (would like to get it ported to Mac, but there is no management support at this time)), and I really hate Linux programs that try to pretend to be Windows, or to be Mac (though this is far less common). Be native. Help me bear in mind what platform I am on by the subconscious cues that platform-specific behaviours give me.
by Timothy Knox — Mar 21
1. Make a direct port of their app, with no attempt to be Mac-like.
2. Glue a few Mac features on top of the port.
3. Use the $$$ raised from selling 1 & 2 to do a native Mac version.
Unfortunately, most apps that try that die somewhere in stages one or two, because Mac users want to use Mac Apps. Not ports. I do cross-platform software development (Windows, Linux, and Solaris (would like to get it ported to Mac, but there is no management support at this time)), and I really hate Linux programs that try to pretend to be Windows, or to be Mac (though this is far less common). Be native. Help me bear in mind what platform I am on by the subconscious cues that platform-specific behaviours give me.