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.

▲

preisschild 4 hours ago | parent [-]

You don't have to support "legacy stuff", just make sure a modern linux kernel can boot without apple-specific workarounds

▲

smith7018 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Why 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?

▲

outadoc 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> Why should Apple care if a modern Linux kernel boots without workarounds on their hardware?

To 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.

▲

t-3 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> 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.

Citation needed.

	▲	wpm an hour ago \| parent [-]
		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.