UEFI or its predecessor ACPI are complicated and support a long list of legacy stuff that has absolutely no value to Apple at all so why should they do the development?
It's like asking Tesla for a fuel tank so it would be easier to install a gasoline engine.
replyYou don't have to support "legacy stuff", just make sure a modern linux kernel can boot without apple-specific workarounds
replyWhy should Apple care if a modern Linux kernel boots without workarounds on their hardware? Should they also ensure Windows and Android can boot on the hardware easily?
reply> Why should Apple care if a modern Linux kernel boots without workarounds on their hardware?
replyTo sell more hardware?
Obviously I get your point, but there's a bunch of customers who would like good ARM hardware but can't accomplish their work with macOS. It's not like Apple needs this tiny market, but it wouldn't hurt them either.
> Obviously I get your point, but there's a bunch of customers who would like good ARM hardware but can't accomplish their work with macOS.
replyCitation needed.
Apple still ships a copy of Boot Camp Assistant in macOS Tahoe. It was great to be able to dual boot on Intel Macs and licensing BS aside it would be nice to be able to boot Win11 ARM on an M1.
reply> Asahi uses lots of workarounds (including pretending to be MacOS) to be even able to boot the linux kernel.
replyIn the x86 sphere it isn't that much better either, most ACPI tables are thoroughly broken if Linux announces itself as Linux and not as Windows. In fact, a lot of machines' ACPI tables barely work on Windows.