Not if you expected to buy a general purpose computer.
As it happens, Apple has released development tools and documentation to write and load alternate operating systems on this hardware. The Asahi Linux team have even said Apple is providing even more support than is available in the x86 world nowadays, it's just that this is in many ways a very new architecture.
Could they do more? Sure. Are they obliged to? No. Ultimately it's a product advertised with certain capabilities, no compromises means it can do that as expected, otherwise the phrase is basically meaningless.
I'll also note that few companies advertise their PCs as "general purpose computers", if by that you mean "guaranteed to run Linux flawlessly". Even System76 / Dell developer / whatever, which ship with Linux out of the box, don't guarantee the pc will run, say, FreeBSD perfectly.
Don't get me wrong, as the GGP post puts it, I'd also like to be able to run Linux on a MacBook Pro. But since I don't want to have a wonky experience, since I understand it'll not work perfectly, I chose to put up with the wonky hardware of my HP, which works well enough.
If, however, you actually mean "a computer that runs Windows or Linux"...why not just say so? Rather than passive-aggressively pretending that all you're looking for is "general purpose", with the obvious snide implication that macOS can't provide that...
You're trying to narrow the definition of "general purpose" to mean something else entirely.
If what Amelius pointed out here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32116822 is true, i.e. the documentation is junk. Then, IMHO, Apple is no longer trying to sell "a good piece of hardware"; because they're not documenting its operation.
And, in reality, I find this to be true... what Apple really sells is "an experience".
Whether it's a good or bad experience is likely in the eye of the beholder.
OK, tell me what it is.