There is also awesome software only available for Windows, so I guess you can’t use that either. And there is awesome software only available for Linux, so that’s off the table too.
You missed my point because I wasn't very clear. Apple is actively trying to lock users into its ecosystem, and a few years ago I discovered how hard it was to switch.
I have found that the time invested in learning how to use a tool is far more valuable than having a tool with a few more features. So with that in mind, I choose to invest my time and money learning how to use open source tools.
I would much rather be an expert in an open source tool rather than some tool that only runs in Apples ecosystem. (Just in case one day I can't use Apple hardware for whatever reason.)
Krita is tops.
Blender is awesome.
Inkscape is getting there.
That's reading too much into the lines. Apple wanted to guarantee that a central piece of software for Mac's marketing success was under their control. Maintaining a Windows version of that software adds no value to Apple's users, so they stopped developing it.
From there to "Apple bought Logic to lock people to Macs" there is a huge leap of faith. The majority of Mac uses do not use Logic, so if their goal was to lock their users to their ecosystem, this move makes no sense.
Also, there are good and often better alternatives to Logic, including Cubase, which work on all major platforms. So if you don't want to move to a Mac from Windows or Linux for the next Logic version, you have many good options.
You missed MY point. If you rely on ANY software which is only available on Windows—whether it's published by Microsoft or say BandLab—you are locked into Windows just as surely as Apple software locks you to MacOS.
Your rationale is valid for avoiding Logic Pro, but not MacOS.
Yes, I was agreeing with you, Windows only software _is_ off the table for me. Especially if a "nearly as good" open source alternative that doesn't lock me in to an OS is available.
Because one day, for other reasons, I might be "forced" to switch back to Mac and I will want to take my tools with me.
I will never "voluntarily" go back to mac because I think Apple does actively try and lock people into the ecosystem.
Update To clarify: because I don't want to pay a premium for a computer where I am running tools that work well or better on other machines.
Makes sense to me, but.. I don't know, maybe its not logical. I ran Macs as my primary machine for 10 years. Now I have a different perspective and don't want to go back.
The premium cost part is interesting. When my labour might be worth something in excess of $100k per year to the right corporation, for me to spend an extra $300 per year* on whatever I consider to be higher quality or even just preferred tools is for me the height of triviality.
* Remember that most people only replace their workstations every 3-4 years. So I'm assuming that the Mac could have an "Apple Tax" of over $1,000. Of course most of their machines are a lot more competitively priced than that.
Ahh see, for me the tools are _not_ preferred. (as discussed above I prefer to invest time learning portable tools) and I don't consider the quality to be better, so its just burning $300. I'd rather give it to my kids as pocket money. Or give it to a homeless person. Or literately do anything with it other than give it to Apple.
I can't think of any awesome software that only runs on Linux. I can think of a couple examples of not-awesome software (systemd and wayland come to mind). What do you have in mind?
If you qualify "running" to mean "I can run that executable somehow" then sure. I can use virtual machines and emulation to run anything anywhere.
If you qualify "running" to mean "runs well in an environment the developers will support", there is a lot of software that is only available for Linux.
And that is why I will never go back to Mac.