I probably should have clarified: There's no such thing as a "Mac M2" for a start. (Yet) But I also found this paragraph a bit odd, because the machines I use

I probably should have clarified: There's no such thing as a "Mac M2" for a start. (Yet) But I also found this paragraph a bit odd, because the machines I use locally never match the architecture of what I'm deploying to. In fact (in my view) it's largely irrelevant. I develop on Macs and deploy to Linux and Windows servers, with a mixture of ARM/Intel. I don't quite understand this sentiment. Not to mention the fact that they start off by saying that no one has even tried it yet (presumably to run Nanos in a VM on an M1 Mac). It just seems a bit uninformed and unnecessarily opinionated. As a Mac user it puts me off digging much deeper into the project. Maybe that's the wrong takeaway, but that was my first reaction.