Would you be willing to fund a Linux port to Apple Silicon?
Most of the solutions in this thread are simply not viable. Stuff like the Pinebook and Raspberry Pi are several magnitudes away from Apple&#x27;s M1 SoC. No amount of hackerish imitation will bridge that gap, the laws of physics are not kind to consumer product hardware hackers. It is very obvious that most of the people commenting here has never held a soldering iron, nor taken a single computer architecture class. The only true way to match Apple on both performance and efficiency is to fund custom silicon. Cerebras needed 100 million to get started. Apple has already laid the architectural groundwork, a chip with similar performance numbers can probably be commissioned with ~50 million. Another 10-20 million for the emulator&#x2F;hypervisor crowd to get x86 virtualization up and running. This could probably be done by existing players so the cost can be discounted. A crowd investing approach is most likely the best bet, with the initial rounds being led by a VC experienced in hardware.<p>This is the Sputnik moment for open source. Should ACPI (and its associated lassiez-faire mindset) become obsolete as a standard, then general purpose computing on consumer devices would become history.<p>All the comments about how Apple&#x27;s Macs are not worth it are entirely missing the point. There is nothing comparable to Apple&#x27;s M1 right now. Your Purism&#x2F;Lambda labs&#x2F;Starlabs&#x2F;System76&#x2F;Pine64 usual Clevo shell machine with Linux pre-installed would never be able to compete with a M1 powered system. This isn&#x27;t about 16:10&#x2F;3:2 display ratios, machined aluminium, or HN&#x27;s favorite complaint: &quot;build quality&quot;. Even a well-funded premium laptop company like Razer would not be able produce something to compete with the MBP if they don&#x27;t have a similarly efficient chip. Forget about the bigger players like Lenovo and Dell. Intel and AMD dropped the ball big time, and if the open source community doesn&#x27;t step up, then the future will be locked-down ARM systems. RISC-V will not be competitive for another half a decade and there is no guarantee that it won&#x27;t be locked down if the community does not push back against the embedded hardware culture (where VHDL&#x2F;Verilog libraries are referred to as &quot;intellectual property&quot;) which pervades ARM&#x27;s heritage.