I have been assembling pretty hot Windows machines for myself as the need arises for well under $500.00 for the past couple of decades. You can buy a lot of software for the price difference between those machines and a similarly capable Apple. I have never really understood the Apple appeal, "when you care enough to spend the very most"... The real question is when the other DAW  and plugin developers are going to make their stuff work on an inexpensive Linux distro running on a generic machine. At that point Windows-only will be a major disadvantage.

pbognar

swamptooth
Well, on the other hand, Logic lost an estimated 70,000 users when it became mac only.

I was one of them.  I bought an Atari 1040 to be able to run Emagic Notator.  There was no way I was going to buy an expensive Mac.

 
Count me in this group...

I think the hesitancy with linux for developers is low to mid level users of linux expect free products. Linux does work for some high end specialized products where the limited market makes an expensive product that needs absolute raw power a practical reason to develope on linux. I don't see the typical Ubuntu user shelling out Sonar money. Maybe if cross-platform license was included.

I also think platform jumping when you already have a potential user base in the millions is a short term desperation move in Cakewalk's position. The DAW market is so crowded that the only way to gain headway is by creating buzz whether it's true or not. I have a friend that is throughly convinced that studio one is going to replace pro tools in big studios and we all will eventually switch as well. His music sounds exactly the same as before but that kind of hype is the sort of thing that makes otherwize rational people switch to a product that is radically better than what they had.

A such job for the portability Windows to OSX should be amazing.
But i think it will be great to see Sonar X(n) under OSX.
It's not so idiot.

slartabartfast
I have never really understood the Apple appeal, "when you care enough to spend the very most"... 

Wow - just reviewing  this thread and bingo - one for the sig lines! Nice! 

I see those with MAC's that are running Windows with the MAC's and Sonar.  As that apparently works OK, I don't see a (cost effective) reason for them to develop a specific MAC version. 
 
And I agree that I can buy or build an equivalent Windows hardware machine for a quarter to a third of the price of an equivalent MAC. 

Now, Linux on the other hand... ;-)

OSX and Windows are not the same.
About hardware, Apple is  very good. No fan, no noise. So it's great.

I bought an IMAC 27" for 550€ .... so it's really great for Sonar.

If Sonar was developed with a specific language under Windows which doesn't exist under OSX, then the difficulties are with its portability.

danardf
OSX and Windows are not the same.
About hardware, Apple is  very good. No fan, no noise. So it's great.

I bought an IMAC 27" for 550€ .... so it's really great for Sonar.

If Sonar was developed with a specific language under Windows which doesn't exist under OSX, then the difficulties are with its portability.

 
It's rather more like OSX was developed under a strange language - particularly objective C. Little choice on the Mac for developing native Cocoa applications. 

As far as I can tell - Sonar doesn't appear to be using a custom (portable) windowing library API, which is what's required to get it to run on dissimilar OSs. Then again, neither is Logic.