Perhaps not surprisingly, they didn’t communicate the most obvious reason: Apple Silicon has shown that it’s not only possible, but that there is potentially huge value in desktop Arm.
That would mean ARM has a strong incentive to promote non-Apple ARM platforms.
Simply having less x86/Intel around can't hurt. Competitors are going to want similar battery life. This effectively means ARM. Also, there's now ARM chips being used in very capable laptop, desktop, mobile, and server applications. All of this reduces cross-architecture friction (cross-compiling, different memory models, etc).
My current laptop is the latest XPS. What a fucking power-hog. Dell's done well at giving me OK battery life, but I pay for the power with pretty appalling thermals. I LOVE the idea of a fanless laptop that also lasts well into double digit hours. So much so that this is a non-negotiable requirement for me. Just like the Surface lineup instantly disqualified all 16:9 laptops from my life for eternity, the M1 has instantly disqualified shitty thermals for me.
Why would they have to pay royalties per chip? I would've thought the whole point of a perpetual license on the ISA was that they didn't have to do that. What am I missing?
Apple is a high-profile demonstration that ARM is perfectly suitable for desktops (well, laptops). Also, Apple usually doesn't corner the market - instead it blazes the trail and others follow (see smartphones, tablets, retina displays, watches and lousy keyboards). If history is any guide, others will soon follow.
All of this sounds like a great thing for ARM. Now, if only it survives nVidia...