+1. Speaking of funny Mac parodies, here's a gamer Switch parody you may have seen.

Haha. Pure fiction, but I can see how the fallacy would appeal to a Windows mentality. In actuality, of course, the same games run just as well on a Mac with some benefits: I love how they are encapsulated, rendering any malicious code inert. Also, forget about rogue install files written to a shared registry, eventually destabilizing the entire system. But it isn't as funny to put it that way. :)

there's a fair bit of mac only software i wish was available on PCs.... but i tend to email the developers direct. Never seems to work though... :-(

False. Here's a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mac_OS-only_games]few games[/url] he's not playing.

Without DOSBOX, a lot of the games on this site won't run under more recent versions of Windows, either. By this standard, DOS games (like Fallout?) are just as compatible with OS X as they are with Windows.
So it's not an unreasonable request. Though you're right, it did seem rather whiny.

You can play Marathon on the PC.. free, too!

It didn't sound whiny. I have read much more whining about Steam around the forums. Anyway, you're right: it's not the least bit unreasonable. The GOG website is even designed with the Mac look. I imagine OS X will get some GOG lovin' eventually, though I am not holding my breath. There are suitable solutions in the meantime.

Yes, it is unreasonable. "The GOG website is even designed with the Mac look"?!? What does that have to do with anything? Do you realise how much work it takes to make a DOSBox game the GOG way? They have to make a "perfect" DOSBox configuration for the game for the platform it's supposed to run on. They have to test it from here to kingdom come. They have to make an installer for it, and test that. And they have to support it all afterwards. And then they have to recoup that investment of time and money by selling enough copies of the game. At $5.99, after the rights holders get their share that takes a lot of sales. Look at the market share of Mac OS'es. 4.87% vs. 93.06% for Windows. I don't think that warrants branching out onto that platform. It's just not economically feasible.

Most of those games are ancient. And I mean by GOG standards here. But you could equally mention console exclusives as a means of disproving "all of them".

Nah, he said computer games, I couldn't find a list of games released on Atari, Commodore and Amiga (no idea who owns/owned who, but those are all computers instead of mainly being gaming consoles), that was not released for DOS as well, so the mac games had to suffice... though on that page there's a link for Mac OS X-only games, but that's less than a handful.
Also, it was a bit of a sarcastic/joke-ish remark.

One of the things I notice about the games that are published for OSX are the prices. The Windows versions of those games go down in price after a few months to a year. But the OSX versions stay at or near the original price for nearly forever. I guess the publishers figure that if your willing to pay Mac prices for hardware, you'll pay Mac prices for software too.

In the case of those games that are DOSBox or ScummVM based, all of GOG's offerings are technically already compatible, you just need to extract the game files from the installer. If all he wants is a pre-packaged installer, then this is worse than whining, its lazy whining. As an avid user of another alternate OS (Linux), I know part of the "burden" of choosing an alternative to Windows is that you occasionally have to work for it. IMO, this is a good thing as it teaches you how to properly use your computer, something Windows no longer does for its users.
However, you do also raise an interesting point (which I vaguely remember making in a previous thread). Other than those games that are DOSBox or ScummVM based, it may not even be possible or beneficial to port GOG's games to Mac. From a technical standpoint, I'm sure there are ways they could get true Windows DirectX games ported (Cider springs to mind), but that does involve additional development time and cost. That time and cost would be very difficult to recoup, given the small number of Mac users out there and the fact that an even smaller portion of those Mac users are interested in gaming and might buy their games from GOG. It's probably not even worth it for GOG to consider porting the games. Of course, we can't forget the legal aspect of it. We cannot assume that GOG's licensing/distribution agreements with any publisher allows for them to port the games to Mac, so even if GOG wanted to port the games, they might not be allowed to.

Actually, it probably has more to do with the fact that it takes a lot longer to make back your money on a Mac game than it does on a Windows game, since there are so few Mac users in the first place. That, and Mac users have already shown that they are willing to shell out the cash for premium priced products.

It's easy to bash the Macintosh platform when it comes to gaming but, as another platform it deserves the same respect as any other in my humble opinion. Games are made for Windows because it's the predominant platform (how it got there is another rather fishy issue...) which doesn't mean it's the best or worst. If the Windows Mac ratio were 50/50 I doubt any publisher will hesitate to release a Mac version, or who know a Windows port of the mac game.

Linux (maybe not Mac so much) has a fairly large gaming community. Just yesterday, I read an article about how 5% of the people playing Quake Live are running Linux. Not bad for an OS that only has about 1% of the market. Not sure how many are running Macs.
I think the Linux/Mac community really wants games, but doesn't get as many as it should. The Heroes of Newerth beta would be another example of a game that has a large share of Mac/Linux users.
Yes, Windows has 85-90% of the market, but a very small portion of those who use Windows are gamers. My grandma uses Windows, and the closest thing to a game she plays is solitaire.

Ya, but if even only 8 - 10% of Windows users are "gamers" that group is still larger than the entire Mac and Linux communities combined.