I believe he is referring to x86. ARM has the advantage in mobile because of power efficiency, but it does not have the compatibility with the commodity consume

I believe he is referring to x86. ARM has the advantage in mobile because of power efficiency, but it does not have the compatibility with the commodity consumer hardware necessary for the desktop/laptop experience. I would like to see evidence of ARM being able to match the performance of x86 in difficult desktop computing tasks, and then I might consider that being an option. All popular tasks done using Windows applications need to be accessible to users. Some ways I see this happening: 1) An alternative application for everything is provided (many companies are working on this, including Google...) 2) Provide seamless interfaces to Windows applications on the same platform, utilizing hardware virtualization 3) Provide seamless, high performance abstraction at application/process layer that can run Windows apps (JVM, WINE) Options 1 and 3 would liberate the operating system from x86, but major improvements to the hardware and/or the software stack are needed to drive options 2 and 3. I am not confident ARM will be efficient/fast/compatible enough to knock x86 out of the box for typical desktop computing tasks even if option 1 is achieved. Though there is certainly potential for improvement/development of ARM in all of the aspects where I'm suspicious it is lacking compared to x86, I think that would take longer than it would to achieve option 1. There is also the possibility of creating a new architecture that is either compatible with or has features equivalent to x86, or performs so well that it can accomplish option 3 seamlessly, but that will also take a long time to pan out.