You said that arm has been promising but not delivering. But now Apple is selling the M1 which runs Intel software faster than the previous Intel Mac did. Even though it had to be emulated. So it’s pretty clear that arm can provide high performance.

Though the rpi shows that arm can also deliver bad performance…

That doesn't invalidate claims about ARM not delivering - because a big part on the undeliverable is how booting any ARM board is still a shitshow (no, le random uboot build with FDT files is not a proper platform)

any ARM board is a stretch. Several rockchip boards can boot with mainline uboot and no firmware blobs.

And this board, the honeycomb, has an actual uefi implementation.

If anything the SoC vendors are getting in the way, not ARM itself. They just license CPU and GPU designs.

ARM took its sweet, sweet time delivering SBSA and its follow ons. Including keeping the specs secret for a time. To call it anything other than self-own would be reaching.

Because yes, ARM stewards also the UEFI efforts on ARM.

It's why I laud Honeycomb and similar companies that actually take care to implement sensible firmware.

I agree with you both very strongly. :) I think the SoC vendors have been one of the primary obstructions in ARM availability. But I also think ARM has failed to take responsibility for ecosystem success, has let their market position rot into place.

the m1 is an example of arm only being available to a very rareified, select user: apple, the biggest tech company on the planet by far.

qualcomm's 8cx gen2 is a possibly interesting consumer offering i miggt cite if i wanted to talk about arm inroads. but again much harder to acquire & use than x86, no public documentation. and the core is from december 2018 (kryo 495), which feels like a typical arm pace: very slow to get modern chips in consumers hands, except bleedingly expensive flagship phones.