I have always been a PC person, but ideally one day I would like to own both PC and Mac machines so that I can be well-versed in both platforms (I would never completely “switch”). The biggest thing that prevents me from ever buying a Mac, however, is that I have some expensive and legitimately purchased software already for PC and there’s no way I would re-buy it for a Mac.
Now in looking at license agreements for different software, it’s not uncommon for a single user software license to allow you to install software on 2 or even 3 of your personal machines (if you have a desktop and a laptop, etc.). But they never seem to bundle the Mac and PC installations of software - always selling them as separate products. Yet I’m sure there are plenty of people who own both platforms who would love to buy a bundled version so they could put it on both.
Is this just a result of severe copy-protection fears? Is the time and effort put into developing for the other platform so large that they have to sell it as a separate product to recoup their expenses? Is it something else? And is this practice likely to ever change?
The main reason is cost. The PC has by far the lion’s share of the market. Including both versions adds an extra expense that is of no benefit to most users.
Surely though they could at least offer a discounted bundled version to entice users of both platforms. For example, say Photoshop costs $400 (ballparking, whatever it really is) and I own a PC and a Mac and I want it on both but don’t want to pay $800 to buy it for both. But I might be willing to spend $600 for a bundled version.
In the future, Steve “Jesus” Jobs may do to the Mac what he does with the iPhone/iPad: All software written for the iPhone/iPad may not be ported to other platforms. And no usage of non-Apple development tools because Steve needs to get richer.
It’s in the developer agreement somewhere, which Steve “Satan” Jobs requires coders to agree not to disclose or you will be sued till the Rapture comes.
Even if there are versions of the software for each platform, bundling both versions in a single package will increase costs. But with very little corresponding increase in sales, because very few people use both a PC and a Mac.
And there is a reasonable fear that PC-owning buyers would just sell the Mac version to a friend who owns a Mac.
So increased costs, with no significant increase in sales, and a possible increase in pirated versions – what incentive is there for a company to do this?
I’ve purchased games that were playable on both systems. Most games are not made in a Mac version though. This was because of the lower number of computers that could run the game and they didn’t want to spend the money to port it to a MAC when that money and people could be used for PC Game development. They only have so many resources.
FileMaker puts the installer for MacOS and Windows on the same installation CD and has done so since they went from floppies to CDs.
I seem to recall that their server software was originally NOT like that but they do that now as well; and for the brief time when they also provided a Red Hat Linux version of their server software, that was on the same CD as well.
I don’t buy much shrink-wrapped software, or licensed software, come to that. Not when there’s good freeware available to do what I want. But it seems to me that a lot of it IS packaged for both platforms. For instance, my copy of H&R Block At Home (formerly Tax Cut) for this past tax season came on a disc with both Windows and Mac distributions on it.
One of the reasons I often look for shareware type solutions to software needs is that I’m more likely to find companies that will let me use a registration key on both the Mac and PC versions of their software.
The 2 or 3 computer license makes me think you’re looking at Microsoft Office. That illustrates how the the Mac and PC versions of some programs are really totally different programs. There is a Mac Business Unit within Microsoft that handles the Mac version. While there is communication and some coordination between them and the PC development side, they aren’t just reusing the same code but actually building a new application. When it’s developed like a separate application, it makes sense to sell it like one too.
If they are already offering both versions, I don’t see why it hurts to put them both on the same disk. They’re really selling the license, anyways.
Also, I’ve encountered quite a lot of software with both versions on one disk. The difference is that they usually have a different that can use the same data files to actually run. A common example are Quicktime powered games.
