> Both of these took considerably longer to get mainline support that your average x86 hardware needs.

Not sure what you are thinking here. It's taken 25 years so far and we still have tons of x86 hardware which isn't supported well in Linux. There is a reason Dell ships a specific laptop for developers with Linux pre-installed.

> There is a reason Dell ships a specific laptop for developers with Linux pre-installed.

And yet, even Windows DELL laptops are more likely to run mainline Linux than any average ARM SoC, even including the ones targeted at developers.

I am no fan of x86, but trading what we have now for an M1 is a net loss in terms of our ability to install anything we want as users, no question.

Consider for a moment how many independent developers rely on x86 based Linux systems versus ARM. x86 isn't open, Linux's support for it is a symptom of Intel's monopoly.

> And yet, even Windows DELL laptops are more likely to run mainline Linux than any average ARM SoC, even including the ones targeted at developers.

This is more about inertia and developer resources than openness. The more developers you have on ARM, the faster device and software support will come.

> I am no fan of x86, but trading what we have now for an M1 is a net loss in terms of our ability to install anything we want as users, no question.

You've changed the question here. We were speaking about ARM in general, not the M1.

Well there's two issues there. One is if the bootloader is open, which it is.

The second is if there's linux port for that hardware, which it isn't. There's a project underway, seems likely that the CPU (which is still AARCH64) will work, and likely networking. However to make a usable desktop you'll need a GPU which is much harder.