To begin with, people who claim that with the RPi4, the Arm architecture has moved into viable servers, have a somewhat unusual definition of "server". Certainly very small machines can be used as toy examples of servers, for example for instructional purposes. But the bulk of installed servers are a completely different class of machines, typically with lots of memory (server memory in data centers is today measured in TB, not in GB), with much higher IO and networking horse power (typical ethernet interfaces being deployed today are dual 100gig, and the number of PCIe Gen4 or Gen5 in the next generation of servers to be deployed next year or 2021 is counted in dozens). The RPi4 is roughly a factor of 100 behind these metrics. It remains an educational computer, or a toy for amateurs.
By the way, that doesn't mean that I'm knocking the concept of the Pi. I think I own 3 or 4 of them (two of which are sort of in production), and I greatly enjoy using them at home. But that doesn't mean that I leap to the conclusion that they are the solution to all the world's problems.
Instead the millions of hobbyists learn Debian and will of course later in their jobs go the Linux way they know and opt for a RHEL server instead of a stable professional FreeBSD-Server they never got to know.
You sound like using Linux is a bad thing. Your goal seems to be to reduce the number of Linux users, and the tool you want to use is to increase the number of FreeBSD users. I disagree: Using Linux is a good thing. As is using Windows, or a Mac. Or not using computers at all and instead doing crochet or woodworking. I have a really big problem with basing one's support of FreeBSD on one's dislike or hatred of Linux.
There is another deep question: Should it be the goal of the FreeBSD core cabal (the people who make decisions about the future of FreeBSD) to increase the number of users of FreeBSD? Or should they instead try to create a better OS for those people who are using it, even if that number is and remains small? Or maybe should they do something yet different? I don't claim to know what the correct answer to these questions is; I'm just happy that for me FreeBSD is a convenient tool for some of my tasks.
However, this architecture is moving towards servers, so that's now why FreeBSD seem to be getting serious about it.
Yes, I've been hearing about the Arm architecture moving to servers for about 10 years now. I no longer believe that it will happen, because it seems to always be forecast for "next year". In the last 10 years, all non-x86 server architectures have died one by one, and today even PowerPC is barely hanging on. Instead, we now have a healthy competition between AMD and Intel (with AMD making significant inroads), which is causing their chips to suddenly get much better. If one looks at the roadmaps for server CPUs, there has been a significant acceleration in the last 5-7 years, and it is simply because (a) AMD is trying to make an end-run around Intel, and (b) Intel is actually paying attention to improvements, because for the first time they have competition. This leap forward makes it harder for alternate server architectures (Arm, PowerPC) to make headway.
The other factor is that a significant fraction of server compute power is moving off CPUs, and into graphics processors and other exotics. This is definitely true for HPC (where a large fraction of all compute power is already on coprocessors), and it quickly becoming true of the cloud infrastructure. Compared to that seismic change, the question of CPU instruction set is somewhat secondary.
It needs more respect from FreeBSD!
I don't care at all about respect.
who wouldn't prefer a FreeBSD managed toaster to one using Linux?
I want my toaster to work, meaning make a piece of bread that is the correct color and crispiness, as efficiently as possible. I don't care at all what CPU or OS is running inside the toaster. The same applies to my dishwasher and my car. As I said above, I don't see "FreeBSD versus Linux" as a religious war.
Now, in those places where I actually need to select the OS for a computer, I will select the one that is the best tool for the job. For my small amateur home server, that happens to be FreeBSD right now. Although my home server is as much a toy for me as it is a useful appliance (I enjoy configuring and maintaining it).
It can be argued that many of computing's interesting future directions are towards lightweight systems (IoT, most embedded systems - ).
True to some extent. Traditional computing is fragmenting into multiple markets. On one side there are servers with general-purpose OSes, which are getting larger and larger, are de-facto all clustered today, and getting centralized in giant data centers run by fewer and fewer providers. We may be getting to the point where soon there is no logical reason for an individual or a corporation to own a server for their own use any longer. On the other extreme, you are right that we are getting networked and intelligent systems that are much smaller and much more common (every appliance, every thermostat, every door lock and car). But for those, it is not at all clear that general-purpose OSes are the right answer; the reliability and efficiency needs of IoT are probably better served by custom OSes, which to a large extent come from the embedded tradition. The computing devices that humans actually interact with are more and more mobile, tablets, and non-programmable devices such as Chromebooks, with tightly controlled systems for software distribution (such as app stores). This model is better for providing interfaces to humans, with less hassle than traditional "home computers" with their OS and networking hassles.
Your statement would lead me to believe that the the superior licensed FreeBSD will become somewhat irrelevant (more accurately never become relevant) in these exploding future markets.
That is quite likely. And I have no problem with it, matter-of-fact, I enjoy it. The various *BSD projects are largely driven by hobbyists and volunteers, who are doing this for their enjoyment. I really don't see why being relevant matters to hobbyists and volunteers. I would compare developing and supporting FreeBSD to crochet or woodworking. It's fun, you can exchange techniques and results with other people that have the same hobby, and it gives a sense of purpose. But unlike RedHat or IBM, it doesn't need to make money, nor does it need to achieve world domination. Just like my hand-knitted tea cozies are not intended to achieve world domination. And just like I see people with other hobbies (like gardening) as the evil competition that we need to win over.
I think it would be good for students, hobbyists and the FreeBSD community, if many Pi users ran their device on FreeBSD.
That's nice for the students, hobbyists and community members. If they really want it to happen, they are free to volunteer. I just looked at the ARMTier1 Wiki page, and there are lots of boxes where stuff needs to be done, but no people are available.
But would it be good for FreeBSD itself? I really don't know why or whether having lots of Pi users running FreeBSD should be a goal of FreeBSD.