If 'power sipping' ARM64 costs less... won't people want it?
I think it may be that they did not properly investigate the marketing opportunity, to use ARM64 to provide CUT RATE services.
Or maybe they did, and rejected the idea and didn't tell anyone?
in my opinion it could justify the procurement of lower cost ARM64-based cloud servers, which should run cooler, use less 'trons, and maybe even COST LESS for the hardware itself, as compared to its amd64 architecture cousins. Just a thought, anyway. Maybe some other cloudy provider can step in and do this, and take all of the business.
So - what's the highest expense for a cloudy provider:
b) intarwebs bandwidth
d) administrative (building, people, legal, gummint, ...)
I think a and c can be mitigated with arm64. 'b' can't though. So knowing if 'b' is the limiting factor might explain things. [of course 'd' is probably a fixed cost, and I'd expect IT support to be part of that].