Why does Mac have so much shareware?

[quadomatic]

I don't know if it's just me not noticing the state of software on Windows, but it seems like Mac has way more shareware than Windows.

Or, maybe it's that Mac has way more desirable shareware than Windows. There seem to be so many useful applications (i.e. there's an app for that).

And, there are plenty of promotional bundles which pack in all sorts of applications at very reasonable prices. For example, I was able to pick up Rapidweaver and Pixelmator for only $15 a couple days ago.

Any comments on why Mac has so much shareware (and so much good shareware)?

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

The community is a lot more tight knit.

 

[alkemyst]

PC has more, just not as organized.

 

[Kmax82]

PC has more, just not as organized.

It does, but it's usually crapware. Where as with OS X, I find a lot of really useful apps that are super polished.

 

[zerogear]

It does, but it's usually crapware. Where as with OS X, I find a lot of really useful apps that are super polished.

That sounds like you're not Google-fuing hard enough.

 

[nerp]

It does, but it's usually crapware. Where as with OS X, I find a lot of really useful apps that are super polished.

As a Mac user and owner, I'm going to disagree with you. Yes, there are a lot of great shareware apps for the Mac, but there is no way to argue that the PC has less good software. It has more good and lots more bad.

 

[Kmax82]

As a Mac user and owner, I'm going to disagree with you. Yes, there are a lot of great shareware apps for the Mac, but there is no way to argue that the PC has less good software. It has more good and lots more bad.

[my opinion, you're free to have yours]

Possibly, but it's all subjective. I'd rather have one, or two, REALLY REALLY good pieces of software and no alternatives, than 100 mediocre apps and 5 really good ones. It's not worth my time trying to wade through those 105 apps.

That's what I feel like with Windows.

I tried to find an application launcher for Windows a month ago and it took me an hour to go through all of the ones I could find and none of them were half as good as LaunchBar, or Alfred, for OS X.

[/end my opinion]

 

[scootermaster]

[my opinion, you're free to have yours]

Possibly, but it's all subjective. I'd rather have one, or two, REALLY REALLY good pieces of software and no alternatives, than 100 mediocre apps and 5 really good ones. It's not worth my time trying to wade through those 105 apps.

That's what I feel like with Windows.

I tried to find an application launcher for Windows a month ago and it took me an hour to go through all of the ones I could find and none of them were half as good as LaunchBar, or Alfred, for OS X.

[/end my opinion]

Also, when you factor in the app install/remove process [headache] with Windows, it makes things worse. You get a fresh new install and think "Hmmm, I need [blah blah] app!" On the Mac, like you say, you have maybe one or two really nice pay apps, and then maybe two or three really nice free apps. You pick the one best for you and move on. On the PC, you may have to install, test and remove multiple apps, and after doing that awhile, you don't feel like your install is so clean.

At least that's been my experience. Call me anal but having things on my system I don't need or want gives me anxiety.

I do think the original point is well taken, however. It does "seem" that for the Mac, for just about any task, there's a very well polished, nice looking, free app that's probably at least 90% as good as a pay alternative. And for the PC, that doesn't seem to be true. You might get nagware, or adware, or time-limited shareware, but not something of the caliber you'd get on a Mac. If this isn't actually true because of the sheer volume of crap MS shareware apps, then fine, but for the average user it's going to be effectively true.

 

[quadomatic]

It does "seem" that for the Mac, for just about any task, there's a very well polished, nice looking, free app that's probably at least 90% as good as a pay alternative.

And then there are some expensive apps that actually provide significantly more functionality then the free app, which (I feel) is where Mac really shines.

I picked up Textmate and Pixelmator, and there are still more apps that I want:

Transmit (FTP) ($34), CSSEdit ($40), Querious ($29), LittleSnapper ($39), Versions ($50), Unison ($29)

If only I had been using Mac during the MacHeist bundles...

 

[vbuggy]

It's a case of visibility I think.

In terms of 'polish', applications which are, predictably enough, visually polished and are more idiot-resistant get more visible and this results in a feedback loop in the more homogenous Mac user community since relatively few apps for any category exist in comparison to Windows.

Perhaps it's also a fact that people actually pay for 'tentpole' applications in Windows because there are more actually professional / semi-pro users and there isn't as high a percentage of tight students / extremely light home users in the user community mix, that prominent shareware apps in Windows don't get more exposure - or that most of the software isn't considered shareware due to a division between a limited free version and a pay-for version.

Whatever is said, there is tonnes more effective shareware in any category for Windows in comparison to OS X. Do most of them however look like crap due to the author having limited graphic design skills and not *needing* to acquire it? Yes. This is the Mac advantage, if you like.

 

[Murloc]

there's a lot more software for windows, but it's not organized and picking the good sharewares isn't as easy.

On the apple website you can find a big directory of shareware instead, but it's still shareware with limitations.

When I had a mac, I tried lots of shareware. Now I don't do that anymore.

download.com has lots of clean shareware for both windows and mac os though, if you like browsing software it's a good site.

my stance on polish: it's not what makes a program good. It's the UI organization and ease of use that matters.

 

[alkemyst]

People confuse a shiny GUI with a good program.

 

[scootermaster]

People confuse a shiny GUI with a good program.

Sigh*


*You'll note my post conveyed as much original information and was just as sound and well thought out as yours, except mine only took 4 letters. Thank you for your contribution to this thread!

 

[alkemyst]

Sigh*


*You'll note my post conveyed as much original information and was just as sound and well thought out as yours, except mine only took 4 letters. Thank you for your contribution to this thread!

Dude...it's basically true. Thanks for being an asshat.

 

[scootermaster]

Dude...it's basically true. Thanks for being an asshat.

Brevity, while appreciated, should never be had at the expense of clarity or validity, both of which you're missing. Try again.

 

[vbuggy]

Brevity, while appreciated, should never be had at the expense of clarity or validity, both of which you're missing. Try again.

I think you just proved him right.

 

[TheStu]

I think you just proved him right.

About what, scooter being an asshat, or that people confuse a shiny UI for a good program?

I would argue Alkemyst that the flip side of your statement is that people also often mistake a plethora of buttons and options for a good program.

 

[vbuggy]

About what, scooter being an asshat, or that people confuse a shiny UI for a good program?

Well both, although you could add 'pontificating holier-than-thou typical over-enthusiast userbase representative' to the mix, if you like.

I would argue Alkemyst that the flip side of your statement is that people also often mistake a plethora of buttons and options for a good program.

You have a very valid point there, certainly on the Windows side. However it doesn't necessarily preclude them from being more useful, once you've got past slider shock. A simplistic, shiny app is however forever a simplistic, shiny app.

 

[Kmax82]

You have a very valid point there, certainly on the Windows side. However it doesn't necessarily preclude them from being more useful, once you've got past slider shock. A simplistic, shiny app is however forever a simplistic, shiny app.

It's all in the needs.

I think you can have both. Apps like Handbrake, Aperture, Coda, Transmit, Adium, VMWare Fusion, Capo, Cloud, Yojimbo, Alfred, Launchbar... etc... offer that.

It's not wrong to have a nice shiny/simplistic app if that's all that's needed. Overall it comes down to what do I need this app to do. If it can accomplish with two buttons what another app with 100 can do.. then I'm going to choose the one that looks better.. (*ahem I'm looking at you Dreamweaver).