Quote Originally Posted by savageink View Post
maybe they should compute how many people pay them for the middling quality of the current client and pay them with that money? No, seriously, that's a BS excuse when we know the client has been around since HW and they are currently getting a bazillion more monthly sub fees than ever before.
Honestly, I'd be super surprised if they didn't calculate this already and factor it into all the decisions made since 2013 and earlier. Software development is a budget and SE have a lot of metrics to help them make those decisions.

They know how many people are on the OS X client (including me)
They know how many engine developers/QA they have and how much they can produce
They know how much budget the C-Suite have given them to hire more heads for the engine
They know what other tasks need doing in the engine
They know the coding difficulties inherent in their engine

If OS X is important they will assign the resources, if their metrics show it's a relatively small number of us using the Mac Client, then it won't be as near as the top of the list as we would hope.

If the number of people playing on Intel drops and the number of people on ARM rises (which would be wonderful for many reasons!) then it moves up the list.

But at this time... it's clearly not ranking highly. The solution of the Crossover/WINE wrapper is working for now. So, until the day ARM dethrones Intel in a wider sense (again, I hope it will as it's clearly superior)... to push the ARM native version up the list the question remains: What do we cut?

Our best hope, to be frank, will be that Windows on ARM takes off more than it has, and they can then use that impetus to budget in a more native codeset.