I "kinda" get it. But it's not like it's difficult for them to create a poser install. They were doing it all along.

Poser installs were easy before weight mapping was introduced in DAZ Studio and Poser. Now it's a different ball game, because the two programs use different weight mapping methods, and also use different methods to create materials and shaders. Because both programs use different methods for weight mapping and materials, it would mean that developers will have to know how to rig and create materials in both programs, and adding support for both vastly increases development time. Add to that things like "AutoFit" and other features that work in DS but don't have direct equivalents in Poser. If you have a figure that takes advantage of all the latest DS features, Poser won't be able to use them, unless you do some re-rigging in Poser. The reverse is also true ... if you have a figure that takes advantage of all the latest Poser features, DS won't be able to use them, unless you do some re-rigging in DS.

To put this in a more simple way. Compare Adobe Photoshop to Corel Painter. They both do similar things, both create 2D images and such. So you create a document that uses all of the latest and greatest features in Photoshop. And then you learn that Corel Painter also opens Photoshop files. "Great!" you think. But when you open the PSD file in Painter, you find out that some of the layer styles don't convert properly, or perhaps some of the other features you used in Photoshop don't get imported at all and are ignored. That's a similar situation. Photoshop and Painter are both great programs, but they have different features and approaches. Doesn't mean that one is better than the other, just means that if the software you use gives you the end result that you want, that's what is important.

Hope that makes sense.