PowerPC and the ARM based chips are both RISC CPUs and that is where the similarities begin and end.
Now, if by “one in the same” you mean they are both Apple’s shot at their own in-house CPUs (PowerPC was designed by Apple, IBM, and Motorola so they were sort of designed by Apple) then you’d be correct. But no, M series and PPC are not the same.
PowerPC CPUs were x86 killers or “Intel killers” for quite awhile actually, at least for certain tasks. Clock speed per clock speed it was generally much faster at doing most tasks. This was true until the AMD Athlon XP and early Intel Core series era which was when Apple switched. That wasn’t because PPC sucked, it didn’t. It was because IBM sort of screwed them over. FreeScale later proved that PPCs are still viable.
As to the rest of this post about PC users vs Apple users or whatever; that’s totally moot at this point. The only people who use computers now are students, workplace/office stuff, hobbyists, or gamers. Everybody else uses their phone or tablet. The whole PC vs Mac argument is becoming more and more obscure because computers are. Office/work place scenarios use PCs, because they’re cheap and anything that has a keyboard could do the job. Gamers use PCs for obvious reasons. Students mostly use Macs because of portability and battery life; and like most users probably don’t give a sh*t what operating system their note taking application (MS Word) is running on.
Since the rise of SSDs, processing power is also mostly irrelevant. Making the x86 vs M series more irrelevant. A Core 2 Duo running Windows with a decent SSD isn’t going to feel any slower to the average consumer launching Chrome or MS Word than an M1 Mac is.
The only people who care are again, gamers, hobbyists, and the handful of creative professionals and software devs.
