Apple has developed it’s version of different software types to go against other packages on its system which snuffs out 3rd party developers from trying to make anything else. This also makes it difficult to find the software at times as well, ie: Media Players, Compression, ect for those not familiar with OS X vs what you can find for Windows.

What would Adobe do if Apple came out with a Photoshop like app? Apple did something like this when it did the iApplications, there are very few low cost options or innovations coming from someone other than Apple. Once iMovie, then Final Cut Express, and Final Cut came out it virtually killed off the competition on the Mac for NLE’s (Non-Linear Editor. Now their challenging After Effects with Motion which has recently add 3D to it.

I’m looking almost like it from the perspective of Blu-ray and Sony one of its major backers. Why would other studios essentially support the competition’s format when they’ll be paying their competition to further compete against them content wise.

Competition is always a good thing though but in the case of Apple they control nearly everything from the hardware to the software and everything in between.

It is way cheaper to support the Mac than it is to support Windows. The variations of the OS + the variation of the hardware make it very expensive and time consuming. The same logic applies to development. Variations aside, I can tell you that developing an app like Daylite or Billings (http://www.marketcircle.com), would take longer. The tool on the Windows side are improving, but I think Cocoa still has an edge – and that makes a difference.

So while the “market share” may be smaller – it is also less costly to operate on the Mac.

The Mac is also far more friendly for smaller developers like myself than Windows. Much of the emphasis on the Mac is selling software online, which allows for far more smaller developers to make it big.

While the Mac community represents only a small percentage of overall computers installed in the market, it also represents a huge number of people in several markets we are targeting: creatives, designers, press people – and yes – students! We give away our software and service, but reaching these creative markets is an essential strategy for our budding company. In his article on ubiquitous computing, Mark Heiser says (I’m paraphrasing) that the when technologies “disappear” people can clearly see goals beyond the technologies themselves and create something new. The Mac users are already freer to pursue creative endeavors and other goals. These are the same people who may have the vision for the next “killer app” in the budding Mobile 2.0 market. I want my software running in these creative circles.

Should we develop a Mac version of our software? Well, it depends on whether your customers use Macs, obviously.

While “market share” numbers insist that they aren’t, remember that market share amounts of PCs sold. It doesn’t necessarily equate to what your customers are using. If people are buying loads of low-powered PCs and your software requires high-powered PCs, the “market share” doesn’t really matter.

Depending on your software, you might be better off developing your new piece of software for the Mac instead of Windows. It’s easier and cheaper to create buzz on the Mac because it’s a smaller group. Get a bunch of Mac guys raving about how great your software is and you’ll have buzz when you bring it to Windows. That’ll help you cut through some of the noise in the Windows world and get Windows users interested. A good example of this is Bungie in the games realm.

Another entertaining reason to develop for the Mac is the smaller group for testing purposes. The iTunes Store as an example. Apple worked out most of the kinks with a smaller group of Macintosh users and got most of the back-end problems solved before opening it up to the larger universe of Windows users.

A variation on the above also has to do with your competitors. If you’re entering a market that is crowded in Windows but empty on the Mac, you might be better off developing on the Mac. Is it better to be a big fish in a small pond or a small fish in a big pond? Again, if you’re trying to generate interest in your product, being the big fish can certainly help.

Finally, you might be smart to do both. Depending on what your application does, having a “cross platform” solution is a big win for site licenses. Consider, for example, antivirus software. The leading antivirus software vendors all have Mac versions of their software. Why? Because if I have 10,000 desktops, according your marketshare numbers, I have 600 Macs that I need to support and I’m definitely going to look favorably on a single solution for all my machines rather than having to buy one system for my Windows users and another system for my Mac users. So without having a Mac version, you’re not going to get the $500,000 site license to support my 9,000 Windows machines. In this case, supporting the Mac helps sell Windows versions.

A fun example of the above, dealing with percentages: Years ago, I worked for a company that developed a cross-platform school administration system. They were considering dropping Mac support. The argument was that “Macs account for only 25% of sales.” How did they come up with that number? Well, the sold two SKUs: A Windows-only SKU and a Mac & Windows SKU. And they sold about half-and-half. Therefore, the 25% number came from the belief that half their customers bought the Mac/Windows SKU so it was 25% (half of 50%). I immediately pointed out that if the company didn’t have the Mac/Windows SKU, they wouldn’t have 50% of their sales.

So there are a bunch of good reasons to develop for Macintosh. It really depends on whether your customers have Macintoshes. That requires actual research, which is difficult. So many people just maintain that “Well, everybody uses Windows.”

Mac users buy more software per computer than the average PC user does, hence the disparity in software sales vs. marketshare.

The reason there is software for the Mac is that it makes them MONEY.

Not because they like customers, like OSX, or any other fuzzy, feel-good reason. It’s money. Despite the Mac’s “mere 6%” of market share, it ends up being millions of computers and millions of customers.

And speaking only as a complete Mac zealot, when I see any decently sized company choose to nly go Windows with a product I can see doing well on the Mac, I dismiss them as small potatoes.

why would a automation and instrumentation company make Labview for macs? How big is mac market in this area.

Matlab just ported to Intel macs, They still use X11 for the gui, but still its something. Perhaps we might see a cocoa based gui from Mathworks.

I think the consensus among Mac developers and cross-platform developers I have spoken to is that people develop for the Mac because they want to and they develop for Windows because they have to. I have always imagined this to be the case for some of the larger developers too.

I would imagine that a lot is developed on OS X and ported to Windows (not that it doesn’t happen the other way around) for a company like Adobe. A large portion of their professional clients (the ones who actually buy their expensive software) are also Mac based which means that although Windows sales are a much higher percentage, Mac users are still there in drones. I would imagine that last year less than a third of their Mac install base bought CS2 (their bread and butter product) in anticipation of CS3. Ask the same question in a year and I would be the percentages even out a little more.