> Sure, I suppose it's just that if something claims to be cross-platform, and is using a common framework for that, I'm happy to assume it's either exactly the same or the same modulo title bar, and not require 'proof'.
As the old saying goes, assumptions make fools out of you and me. If we are to assume anything, I always start with worst case scenario and work my way up to “everything’s fine” rather than start here. If I don’t see it running on macOS, I assume:
- it’s untested and may not work properly
- it doesn’t follow standard macOS UI conventions like drag and drop, which is much more pervasive in macOS than other OS and, when it comes to files, can work quite differently
- it doesn’t support operations like having files dropped on its Dock tile
- it doesn’t support the global menu bar and thus its keyboard shortcuts (if any) aren’t able to be configured via standard means — this is often important for accessibility
- it doesn’t support macOS’ built-in accessibility features, so can’t be read by VoiceOver or show large text via Hover Text
Once you go beyond the superficial, you realise that design is more than just how it looks but how it works — functionality, usability, etc.
All I want is the mildest proof that, at the very least, it has been tested to run on macOS. At that stage, I might put the effort in to check that those other aspects are also covered.
It isn’t my job to find that out; it’s the developer/vendor’s job to prove it so that I’m not wasting my time.
> But I definitely wouldn’t show three copies of the same thing
Of course you wouldn’t, why would you — that’s not even what I wanted to see. I’m only interested in seeing it working properly on my platform.
Most websites will show the platform-specific screenshot rather than all three screenshots. For example, check out https://code.visualtudio.com — on an Apple device, it shows the Mac version; on a Windows device, it shows the Windows version; I’m not sure if it shows something else on Linux, it may do.