I posted this in another comment but wanted to expand on it in a direct reply;

It’s worth noting that a big problem with ARM is it’s not one unified architecture. x86-64 has both the problem and advantage that there are more than one manufacturer of CPU’s, but all of them are boxed into being compatible with Intel. This isn’t true with ARM; while the CPU architecture itself is nominally the same, individual vendors are free to implement that standard in myriad ways with myriad support chips that they can pick and choose or develop themselves. Something written for NVidia ARM won’t run on Qualcomm and vice versa, and neither will run on Mac. Unless stricter standards are wrapped around the architecture we’ll never see a true “generic ARM architecture” system. But that’ll never happen beacause it’s a violation of the terms of the agreements that the fabs signed with ARM.

If a single vendor came along with an architecture design for ARM CPU that everyone liked and that vendor allowed other manufacturers to create compatible designs then we could see that standard appear. Maybe Framework could be that vendor… but right now they’re FAR too small with FAR to small pockets to develop an architecture of this magnitude. It’d have to be adaptable to laptops, desktops, datacenter, embedded… you name it. This would require a company with deep pockets and a LOT of engineers on staff. NVidia has both of those but is NEVER going to publish a standard so that Qualcomm can create a competing CPU. Apple’s not going to open their architecture up either for the exact same reason.