I wonder if Windows ARM will be so mature that by the time these groups get x86 parity with Intel, it won't matter outside of specialized high-performance applications like gaming because we'll be migrating to ARM by then anyway.
Depends. There are ARM Server Processor, there are also ARM High Performance CPU-Core Design ready to be fabbed. So the question here isn't if there is one, it is who has the right incentive to fab one.
Perhaps better to say any other competitive ARM machine, since the actual CPUs are generally fine (not amazing, mind, but good enough) but crippled by unfortunate firmware/motherboards/etc.
We just need general purpose computing to stay alive (and it's not actually being killed with the M1 yet).
RISC-V doesn't make much of a difference here. You can still build highly locked-down proprietary systems using it.
M1 is oh-so close to that
PostmarketOS has made great strides in fixing this issue, but Linux doesn't just work on ARM. You have to port each distro you want to use to each and every device. With a PC, you can buy any Lenovo, Dell, HP, etc off the self and you will always be able to boot to a console; usually graphics mode too. That's not the same case at all with ARM boards.
I wrote more about this a few years back:
Just to really make this obvious in case of any misunderstanding:
RISC-V is an open ISA. You are free to use the instruction set. A microarchitecture implementing the RISC-V ISA can be just as proprietary as the developers please.