Lack of MAC plug-ins
mcorr
Posts: 1,104
There has been a rash of cool windowz only plug-ins and add-ons that, in effect, are consigning MAC-users of Studio to second or even third rate status, and that despite developers (compared to 20, 10 years ago) increasingly writing in code that easily allows both windowz and MAC versions to be compiled. If what I can do with Studio on a MAC continues to shrink and shrink due to the phenomenon of developers not including a MAC version, then I’ll have to draw my conclusions from that. I hope DAZ will incentivize developers (potential new developers if the old ones can’t do it) to release MAC stuff alongside windowz. We’ve had 5-6 really, really useful plug-ins lately that are only Windowz. It’s time DAZ creates conditions that enlargen the pool of potential users/buyers of such plug-ins. It would be a win-win for all.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Writing a plugin for both platforms means that the developer should have access to machines running those platforms.
Not everyone can afford or wants to have a mac laptop and I doubt Daz will be ready to buy developer PAs a new Mac laptop.
Yeah... Macs are expensive. Getting a mac that's on par for system specs to my current machine would still be at least double what I paid for my current machine three years ago.
Daz has thrown in its lot with Nvidia. Mac plug-ins for Daz will be economically viable when Apple goes back to supporting Nvidia cards.
Theres also the userbase demographics. Windows users heavily, heavily outnumber any other OS use by around 9 or 10 to 1 (and no, it's no different in "creative" fields).
Convincing someone to do most the work again for around 1/10th of the original payout isn't the most tempting offer ever.
It seems people aren't reading or fully undertstanding what I said. The comments made are not useful as regards creative suggestions/input to help solve a problem I have identified: they are the equivalent of just looking at an accident and gawking. Maybe some MAC people could chime in and support the gist of what I am saying here. Let me repeat:
(1) If you develop add-ons/plug-ins using the right programming language/software (to the extend that is even necessary), you can easily complie a version for Windowz and MAC. You don't need to develop a MAC version from zero. If the developer is not in a position to beta test/QC a product, a MAC collaborator could.
(2) Regarding my other observation, DAZ should at least connect/introduce/facilitate Windowz developers getting together with MAC developers to release a MAC version of stuff if the Windowz developer lacks the necessary skils to do so on his/her own (that is a , let me repeat, win-win-win-win situation for all: DAZ, the original developer, the MAC guy, and end-users). If needed, more talented programmers should be actively recruited by DAZ to develop dual platform products. All of this is a NO-BRAINER for god's sake. I don't understand why I need to explain how it is to everybody's advantage to do the smart thing, or to even have to explain what the "smart thing" is.
(3) The fact remains, continuing with less and less MAC (or dual-platform) stuff being released--that is to say, ignoring MAC customers--will result in various undesireable outcomes, which require action at this point in time (given long development lagtimes) to avoid future problems.
It would be ashamed if DAZ Studio is perceived (for whatever reason) as MAC unfriendly.
I do think people tried to help. The reasons above relate directly to your points above. I'm not trying to be abraisive, but I'll take a stab at laying out the points how I see them to be and hopefully it jumpstarts your conversation for you.
1) Firstly, you used the qualifier "right programming language". I'm not a computer programmer, so I don't know which ones those are. This tells me, however, that there is a different choice that the devs of plugins could make that must not make it as easy to complile to Mac. So, those guys are out, right? And then, those that did use the right programming language would have to at least check their code to make sure it works. This is where the point above about not eveybody having Macs comes into play. It's not gawking, it's a fact. You can't test something on a platform you don't have. I find it hard to believe you can just hit the magic "convert to Mac" button and it works out of the box without having to load it up and try it. (Replies 1 and 2 apply here)
2) This isn't a bad idea, but I don't think it's as win-win-win unless DAZ starts adjusting payouts to compensate for the lack of user base. Even if the amount of work is cut in half because the initial coding and everything is done, you still have to do some amount of work. And it's completely possible that even that low amount of work, reduced as it is, doesn't pay back as lucritively as just putting out another completely unique product using the tools you're comfortable with for a much larger demographic. Like I said, I don't think this is a bad idea, but making it out to be cut and dry is, at least to me, a little harsh. (Reply 4 fits here)
3) Yes you are right, if this trend continues we will see less and less Mac users on the Daz software. It's basically a self-fulfilling prophecy at this point... People use Windows if their primary intent is to do 3D on DAZ, so content caters to those people, some of those people become PA's, and continue to develop on the hardware they own and are accustomed to, and more people move to Windows. It is unfortunate, to be true, and there may be ways of pulling in the right direction, but I don't think it's an "easy" call because you're going to ultimately either have to find someone to work for less dollars per hour that they already do when developing Daz content, or the company will have to make a concious effort to try to bring the needle back to zero, which would mean making a decision that loses them money in the short-run to build up a customer base in the long run, and it's their decision to do that or not. (Reply 3 fits here. The NVidia thing hurts, to be sure, but there could have been considerations made to also include more compatibilities for hardware types, but it's Daz 3D's decision to do so. If they don't see the value, or have prioritized other things, as a user I can either talk about it or accept it, and we're talking about it here, but unless more people jump in that's where it ends.)
Personally, I have no idea how we can solve the Mac-doesn't-get-updates problem. It isn't a technical one, it's a financial one, and those are lost on me. If you're asking anybody to pull in a direction other than what makes them the most amount of money per "effort unit" or whatever name you want to call effort over time, you need to find a new motivator. For some, it can be passion, and for others its doing something new, but it's almost certainly going to be idealistic if it isn't the big 3: money, safety, or comfort. The problem isn't the hardware, but you need to find people with the needed skills, the right tools, and ensure they have enough motivation to get the job done. The further and further down the path we go, as more and more Windows-only plug-ins arrive, this will be harder to do and arrive back at a point when all plug-ins exist on both sides.
I could be completely wrong, and we have forums so that we can discuss and talk about such things, but from my limited time looking at the problem these are some pretty serious hurdles to cross. Daz Studio on Mac works fine, at it's base, so it certainly is "supported on Mac", but we're reaching a point where some kind of qualifier almost needs to be made so that new users don't get tricked into thinking it's exactly the same. For me, it seems kind of obvious that there should be differences, but I'm not super technical so I'd only think that because I've been conditioned to think that they are different, but if newer users are making the assumption that both sides of the grass are equally green then they could be making uninformed decisions.
On the other hand, it could be the only way to get more Daz Studio Mac users to the table... No, I'm just being snarky... obviously, I'd hope that all users are well-informed on both sides.
MacOS will run on a virtual machine from Windows OS. The problem there is still Daz's decision to go all in on Iray. It's clear from the increasing quantity of Iray-only products and development of Iray-everything that 3Delight is of decreasing interest to them. Also, they offer no solution that is friendly to use of AMD/Radeon graphics cards. It is not an ideal situation, no. Add in the way M$ has been botching recent Windows updates, and it paints a cloudy picture for the future.
The decision to embrace iRay isn't connected to Apple ending all business with Nvidia, though, except that it negatively impacts their bottom line. It isn't ideal for Daz 3D, obviously, but such is business. I'm just saying that they couldn't have predicted that at the time, but not defending where we are, now.
Personally, I'd like to see a Keyshot Bridge be made available, but I suppose then it would be a key shot product, not a DAZ 3D one.
I agree with your sentiment, though, with so many options out there it would be nice to not be locked into the few we are. Certainly, this would begin the trend back in the Mac direction.
Apple, for its part, also made the rather unpopular decision to end support for OpenGL. I would never buy an Apple product. So, Mac support part makes no difference to me. But the over-dependence on Iray in DS is myopic at best. Support for Iray: GOOD! Support for Iray at the expense of all other solutions: BAD! My 2-cents. ;) Keyshot support would be good.
I'd like to see some love for ProRender, too. Then AMD cards become a very viable choice.
True, good choice here. AMD is pumping out some quality stuff, and if 3D rendering (as a whole) started to embrace their hardware a little more it could even affect what NVidia does. We've already seen Intel's response to the pressure applied by manufacturers embracing AMD CPUs...***
*** Edited to mention... not that Intel's quality has gone UP, but that their base price for their high-end stuff has drastically gone DOWN. Still... higher performance or lower cost, either way it benefits somebody.
The thing about adding support for multiple render engines is that PAs would be expected to provide material support for those render engines as well. Then there will be the issue of new users coming in with non-Nvidia hardware being unable to use the thousands of existing Iray-based assets without a lot of additional effort.
I'm not saying it will never happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Alea iacta est. The best option for Daz is to provide a better pipeline for exporting Daz store assets to other platforms that do support other hardware.
Converters. People using old content already convert textures to Iray or Iray to 3delight or poser sss to whatever. Need not be onerous.
People are also using Octane or Luxxeon, or exporting to various other programs. So, converters! But doesn't matter. Highly unlikely Daz will do anything like that.
I don't think the isssue is textures which converters might help but scripts, prograns, functionalities like face trasfer etc... which have nothing to do with converters...
It comes down to economics, and NO, the economics do not work. I am often the one who might say something is a 'win-win', but in this case, nope. Obviously it would be good for that literal 5% of people using Mac. But it would be bad for just about everybody else. A lot of PAs are doing this full time. So time is money, and time is very important. It is the same reason you see so few products support 3DL today...time. It would take longer to do all that, plus it has to be tested. Don't forget Daz is supposed to test each product before it gets placed into the store. It should be easy to understand that a product that supports multiple platforms would thus take longer to test. Taking longer to test also adds to the time it takes for a product to hit Daz store shelves. Again...time is money. If the payout was great, then absolutely the PAs would support Mac or 3DL. But the payoff for supporting them is quite low. For the PA, they could be up and developing another new product to get in the store instead of spending time on something that a very small number of people would want. Its just simple economics.
And with the things Apple is doing, you can't lay the blame on Daz and PAs. No support for OpenGL??? The Daz viewport uses OpenGL! And then you have the Nvidia thing, and all of the other things...frankly its a no brainer to me. If you ask me Daz users need to be the ones dropping Apple, not Daz supporting them.