The Apple profits comparing to their market share just prove that Apple is closer to religious organizations rather than to the rest of the IT industry. With this in mind it's hard to judge Apple business decisions.
For a very long time I was sharing your views. Nevertheless, I realized that in the long run negative impact is reduced and positive impact is amplified.
Yes, there were many interesting architectures which were far more advanced than PC at the time. But PC today is not the IBM PC as of 1981. And Zen3 is not i8088. There are a huge number of improvements and/or reusing/reimplementing of useful things from other architectures. x86-64, for example, is significantly different from traditional x86, it's heavily streamlined, simplified (it's not a typo) and improved. In many ways it's much closer to symmetric CISC ISA like M68K or VAX-11 than original x86. Same is true for many other things - PCIe, USB, DisplayPort, for example. They are far more advanced than any proprietary buses/connections existed before.
By the way: the loss of PC battle triggered the transition of Acorn into ARM as we know it today. I doubt that you regret that.
And while evaluating what the world would look like without PC, it's always worth to keep in mind, that cheap hardware resulted to a wider market ⇒ stronger competition ⇒ faster innovation. Yes, there are troubles, viruses, software problems and incompatibilities. But don't forget, that most people who suffered from this would not have a personal computer at all, if there would be only Apple, for example. You and me most likely would not have jobs and would not be discussing the topic without IBM business decision to make PC open.