I can answer that. Apple already has macOS running on ARM, and has had for years. This gives them two things: 1. Leverage on pricing with Intel; 2. The abili

I can answer that. Apple already has macOS running on ARM, and has had for years. This gives them two things: 1. Leverage on pricing with Intel; 2. The ability to ship ARM macs whenever they are ready. So the next thing is, "what's the definition of 'ready'?" Opinions about that vary. I side wth tthe popular speculation that the 'problem' with macOS on ARM is not macOS, but all the legacy apps that need to be recompiled or run in some kind of emulation or need some other magic solution to "just work." It's easy to ask every developer to recompile, but people have lots of shareware apps, unsupported old apps, enterprise apps, and apps from developers who aren't making enough money to justify putting a lot of work into supporting a new chip. So for now, we have this weird situation where phones and tablets have enormous amounts of computing power but require less power and thus provide longer battery life for a given mass... Mostly to support computational photography. p.s. Completely spitballing here, but I wonder if their hesitation to ship with an emulator—as they did when they made the PowerPC -> Intel switch—is because on a mobile device, emulation might be a heat source and power hog. With desktops, they didn't have the same concern about power draw or heat.