Without Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, InDesign, Word, Excel, Flash and the like, the Mac would have petered into non-existence
I agree, but this list is misleading. Word and Excel are not cross-platform apps. They have the same brand name but they're different code bases than the Windows version. Photoshop and Illustrator were designed for the Mac to begin with, so I think you possibly have to strike those. InDesign is largely based on ideas from Photoshop and Illustrator, so that too is a special case. That leaves Flash but that could be a whole separate discussion. In any case, a cross platform app may succeed if it provides a unique service and there are no "native" alternatives.
So to say "The thing is Mac users just don't want cross-platform apps." is incorrect.
Maybe I could have worded it better. By cross-platform I meant an app that uses a cross platform toolkit for the higher levels instead of native views and such. Of course, yes, Mac users want Visio and AutoCAD, but they version which are designed for the Mac. From what I've seen, Skype is a good example of a port done right. In general, Office takes the right approach as well, though they have a very delicate line to walk between Windows feature parity and Mac sensibilities.
Secondly, Firefox is not a good example. No open source cross platform apps spring to mind that are ideal Mac citizens [...] So that argument should be taken up with the whole open source development community
I don't think it has anything to do with open source. Vienna and Adium are open source applications but they provide a good Mac experience. Camino, in fact, is open source. I'm sure the Mac Firefox developers do the best they can, but it's probably a policy/priority issue. I think Mozilla sees Firefox more as a platform than a series apps tuned for each OS, but I might be wrong.
Thirdly, your statements seem to change from talking about Mac developers not wanting to develop cross platform apps
I re-read what I wrote but I can't find any instance where I intentionally said this. Maybe something was misinterpreted?
I suspect your article is really about the former, i.e., if Macs developers develop for cross-platform, they might either have to lose features in the Win version, or sacrifice them on both.
No, that was not my intention. I suspect Mac developers know about the unique APIs available to them. The point was to help incoming developers from other platforms understand that a "cheap" port just won't fly.
with the trend towards web-based applications, we will see the diminishment of the OS influencing the design of an app
Certainly email and productivity apps can work well on the web, but there are many kinds of apps that just aren't as suited to that sort of client/server model. It's not clear to me how something Final Cut Pro or Aperture would fair considering the need for real-time processing and some very large blobs of data. You need local apps to interact with local devices such as cameras, DVD burners and iPods. The question is whether you want all your productivity apps running in a separate environment from your local apps. Personally, I think you can sacrifice a lot of convenience and usability by doing so.
by Scott Stevenson — Mar 23
I agree, but this list is misleading. Word and Excel are not cross-platform apps. They have the same brand name but they're different code bases than the Windows version. Photoshop and Illustrator were designed for the Mac to begin with, so I think you possibly have to strike those. InDesign is largely based on ideas from Photoshop and Illustrator, so that too is a special case. That leaves Flash but that could be a whole separate discussion. In any case, a cross platform app may succeed if it provides a unique service and there are no "native" alternatives.
So to say "The thing is Mac users just don't want cross-platform apps." is incorrect.
Maybe I could have worded it better. By cross-platform I meant an app that uses a cross platform toolkit for the higher levels instead of native views and such. Of course, yes, Mac users want Visio and AutoCAD, but they version which are designed for the Mac. From what I've seen, Skype is a good example of a port done right. In general, Office takes the right approach as well, though they have a very delicate line to walk between Windows feature parity and Mac sensibilities.
Secondly, Firefox is not a good example. No open source cross platform apps spring to mind that are ideal Mac citizens [...] So that argument should be taken up with the whole open source development community
I don't think it has anything to do with open source. Vienna and Adium are open source applications but they provide a good Mac experience. Camino, in fact, is open source. I'm sure the Mac Firefox developers do the best they can, but it's probably a policy/priority issue. I think Mozilla sees Firefox more as a platform than a series apps tuned for each OS, but I might be wrong.
Thirdly, your statements seem to change from talking about Mac developers not wanting to develop cross platform apps
I re-read what I wrote but I can't find any instance where I intentionally said this. Maybe something was misinterpreted?
I suspect your article is really about the former, i.e., if Macs developers develop for cross-platform, they might either have to lose features in the Win version, or sacrifice them on both.
No, that was not my intention. I suspect Mac developers know about the unique APIs available to them. The point was to help incoming developers from other platforms understand that a "cheap" port just won't fly.
with the trend towards web-based applications, we will see the diminishment of the OS influencing the design of an app
Certainly email and productivity apps can work well on the web, but there are many kinds of apps that just aren't as suited to that sort of client/server model. It's not clear to me how something Final Cut Pro or Aperture would fair considering the need for real-time processing and some very large blobs of data. You need local apps to interact with local devices such as cameras, DVD burners and iPods. The question is whether you want all your productivity apps running in a separate environment from your local apps. Personally, I think you can sacrifice a lot of convenience and usability by doing so.