This is, in effect, maintaining multiple versions of their products. They do this because otherwise their products would not sell in those markets. The rational thing to do, then, in a world where cryptography is required for privacy, but the law prevents the export of strong cryptography, is to deliver strong cryptography systems where you can, deliver legally-required weak systems where you must, and document the sales lost to this policy to the extent possible. Domestically, American software companies should deliver the strongest cryptography now known to their customers, so as to protect their privacy, and to differentiate themselves from each other in an otherwise commodity communications market. Finally, software consumers and the general public have a role to play.
Cryptography is for privacy protection.
If you value your privacy, let both your software vendors know that you insist on buying only products with quality encryption systems in them, and let your Senator and Representative know that the Federal government's predeliction for being able to spy on everyone all the time at the expense of an individual's right to privacy is unacceptable, and must cease to be the policy of the United States of America.