I supported Apple so much when they chose to adopt the Bell Labs system interface. I loved Apple even more when they made it possible to run the C and Assembly

I supported Apple so much when they chose to adopt the Bell Labs system interface. I loved Apple even more when they made it possible to run the C and Assembly code that PC users have always known and loved, using a platform known for its product excellence. However Apple comes across as cruel when they make decisions like these, which break software distributability of things like native machine learning code. For example one build system that enables that use case is: https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan At best these new POWER or ARM architecture Apple PCs are going to be like a C-class Mercedes. So I'm honestly not that concerned. Having distributable open source executables support them shouldn't be that difficult, it's just that it'd add bloat and require trading away important parts of Von Neumman architecture, such as self-modifying code, in order to be done easily. If Apple wasn't being goofballs, they would have taken into consideration that the x86_64 patents should expire around this year, so Apple could have just as easily adapted the POWER design of which IBM divested themselves, to support x86, by simply bolting on a code morphing layer like Xed. Since it'd be pretty great to be able to buy an Apple PC that doesn't have MINIX lurking inside the chip, without making tradeoffs that could be most accurately described as breaking open source software to save money.