So you don't actually want cross-platform apps at all, but either single-platform apps, or apps developed independently for both platforms (because otherwise you're just talking about some in-house cross-platform toolkit).

Why do I as a Mac user care about cross platform apps? Even as a long time Windows user, why would I care about cross platform apps?

I chose a platform because the platform and the apps meet my set of priorities.

As far as how that affects Linux users, even if I did prefer Linux as a developer platform, why make it my daily driver instead of running it in a VM or with something like WSL2?

Well, you're obviously welcome to do whatever you want, but I personally regard this as backwards. I believe in libre software, because I believe it is ultimately going to be better for users (over what timescale, I can't say for sure, but longer rather than shorter), and better for developers and better for technology. So I want to work on a libre platform, to some extent regardless of the applications I need/want to use, and thus I pick Linux first and apps second.

When the app is not there (e.g. a DAW), I merely choose to spend a few decades of my life developing it, thus destroying my ability to do what I originally wanted to :)

As for why would you prefer Linux as the daily driver, that would depend a lot on what you were doing/needed. It is a technically superior in almost every respect (not every, but close). It has better audio latency performance, should that matter, better bandwidth for most things, is generally more customizable to your own preferences (though obviously other platforms may be customizable enough). Upgrades and maintainance is generally simpler and smoother. I like being in control of my technology in a way that Microsoft and Apple increasingly do not allow me to be.

I'm not saying that you have to care about any of that. I do, that's all.

It sounds like you are largely in agreement with GP, who says:

"I chose a platform because the platform and the apps meet my set of priorities."

You listed a wonderful set of priorities which put the philosophy and a certain kind of usability at the top. GP seems to value day-to-day UI/UX within the desktop.

So question for you, with regards to cross-platform, insofar as you value it as a goal, is that to help spread the user base of libre software?

> So question for you, with regards to cross-platform, insofar as you value it as a goal, is that to help spread the user base of libre software?

Essentially, yes. As a developer, I'd like my work to be available to as many people as possible, and I'm not dogmatic enough to insist that they choose to use Linux or another libre OS as their platform. If I want users of other platforms to be able to use my work, I need to somehow do cross-platform development. That means either creating my own cross-platform toolkit, or using an existing one.

As a side note, I'd also say that cross-platform development turns out to be great for finding bugs and design flaws in your software. Exposing it to other compilers, linkers and UI/UX design models has always been a positive experiences, even if often frustrating.

So you regard it as backwards that Apple and Microsoft give users what they prefer including a better user experience? Do you seriously wonder why the “the year of the Linux desktop” never came?

And what good is this supposed “technical superiority” if it doesn’t have any end use benefit? Does it integrate with my other hardware seamlessly like my headphones that switch automatically between my phone, computer and watch? I can start an SMS message thread on my phone and finish on my computer or if I’m sitting at my computer and my phone rings, I answer it from my computer? Does it give me 16 hours of battery life?

And the Mac is kind of known to be great for audio editing if you’re not aware and has first rate software.

I haven’t heard anyone say that the ARM based Mac are poor performers

> I like being in control of my technology in a way that Microsoft and Apple increasingly do not allow me to be.

Would I rather be “in control” of hardware that sounds like a 747 when you do something even mildly intensive with piss poor battery life by modern standards or have a laptop that I can actually work with on my lap and have 16 hour battery life?

Laptops are a different category. I use one, but only for travelling. Most of the time, I work on a massively multicore self-built AMD-based system which is cheap, incredibly powerful and almost silent. My power comes from the sun, and I don't have to care about battery life.

My AMD system has better audio performance than any Apple system I could buy (and I can even run Mojave on it, with better $-per-cpu-cycle than anything Apple would sell me), despite Apple systems indeed having great audio subsystems.

I rarely use headphones, but when I do they are studio quality ones that do not use bluetooth, and are fed via my studio gear, not random consumer devices.

Look, I get that different users have different needs. I'm not trying to persuade you not to use Apple products. I just happen to think that the focus on "how good is this for my day to day needs" can obscure a more important long term truth. Farmers have been discovering this with John Deere for the last few years, another company that makes incredibly great hardware that is totally what their users need. It just turns out the Deere's model of buyer lock-in via repair control is now causing conflicts for those same users.

So when will that day come? Microsoft and Apple have been the dominant desktop OS since the mid 80s. Yes I realize that Apple has hovered between 10-20% since the mid 80a

What day? I never dreamed of the "day of the Linux desktop", if that's what you mean. Couldn't really care less (other than to note that it would be nice).

I meant the day that Windows or Mac users would regret the “lock in” like farmers do with John Deere? Especially since Linux is easy to run on top of either and many of the best tools are ported.

I suppose you don't, at least not as a user. But behind app availability, which is a concern for you, is this whole debate about cross-platform apps. It's likely that the only way you get to continue using your preferred platform and some new app/piece of hardware is if the developers use a cross-platform toolkit.

When releasing software, macOS is a small tertiary concern for me at best, behind Linux (for myself), Windows and mobile platforms. So if you care about app availability, you indirectly care about cross-platform toolkits.

This is going to sound a lot worse than I intend it to. But why would users care about a little indy app that’s a bad port with a non native UI when they have the choice of major, popular, commercial apps from the major players?

Well, maybe they shouldn't. Those popular apps are likely to be better just by virtue of being better funded. But if there were apps from the major players for every usecase, all programmers would be working for Adobe-sized corporations. Thankfully, that's not the world we live in.

Recently I've looked at apps for running a "flat owners' association" in the Czech Republic. The general feeling I got was that maybe one was at least approaching intuitive and good looking design. Using a cross-platform UI toolkit wouldn't hurt these apps one bit.

Besides, the only ones that supported macOS at all were web apps, the epitome of non-native. So if a non-programmer wants to manage such an association on a Mac, their only options are cross-platform apps or a spreadsheet, proving my point.

> Why do I as a Mac user care about cross platform apps?

Because there aren't enough macs in the world for people to make apps just for you, it seems.

> why make it my daily driver instead of running it in a VM or with something like WSL2?

Why run a fast OS when I can run the same fast OS within a slow VM and a bunch of other limitations?

That's a false dichotomy, someone can want a cross-platform app that has shared code but the outcome is "native-like" on each of the platforms. If a cross-platform toolkit can't do that and people consider that its result is a bad fit to some of the platforms, it doesn't mean that these people don't want a cross-platform app, all it means is that this toolkit is not good enough.