After buying this I learned of the Mac version of CCS. Which doesn't require licensing.
That doesn't sound right. What made you think the Mac version doesn't require licencing?
The fact that I am running the latest Mac version and it doesn't have any licensing? There is no place to add a license (the menu option is simply absent) and no indication of licensed status to the user (the status area at the bottom of the window frame is blank). Are you using CCS on a Mac? Where do you enter the licensing info?
Also, the TI instructions for generating the license (obtaining your MAC address) do not have any Mac OS instructions. I think it's safe to generalize and state that most Mac OS users have no clue how to get the system MAC address, GUI or CLI, so it would be important to tell them how to obtain it.
The licencing is to enable unrestricted code size. That applies to all platforms as far as I am aware. Yes you can use the gcc open source compiler to get around that but then you don't get the "benefits" of the TI compiler on some controllers.
Again, are you using CCS on Mac OS? I don't mean that as a challenge, I only ask it because you say, "as far as you are aware". I'm just wondering if you are making an assumption or if you have first hand knowledge.
Why do you say Eclipse is buggier on Mac? Are we taking about the same version of Eclipse, or is there some other software that is downlevel causing a problem?
I'm referring to the base Eclipse features, not the toolchain. I'm using CCS 6.2.0.00050 which is on top of Eclipse "platform" 4.5.1 and CDT 8.8.0. I use Eclipse professionally on Linux so I'm very familiar with its feature set and quirks. CCS on Mac is just hobby stuff for me.