Castle directors patch up 'disagreement'Published: 24th Nov 2006, 12:40:42 | Permalink | Printable
Row over future resolved with open source plansCastle director Peter Wild is back 'on side' with the company after patching up a fall out with Castle boss Jack Lillingston. He said the situation had been "amicably resolved" since the arrival of RISC OS Open to open source RISC OS 5.
Earlier this year, Peter said the operating system must be released as an open source project to survive while putting his own firm's stakeholding in Castle up for sale. His electronic design business, Pattotek, loaned nearly £30,000 to Castle between 2003 and 2004, when Peter became a director.
He said: "I can say a number of points of disagreement between myself and Jack Lillingston have been amicably resolved since Pattotek announced it wished to sell its shares in Castle. Central to this is Castle's plan to open up the sources to RISC OS through RISC OS Open Ltd, whilst hardware products are continued through Iyonix Ltd, effectively leaving Castle as an IPR licensing business."
Although Pattotek's shares are still up for sale "for the right price", Peter said he was not actively pursuing a sale while other issues are resolved, and that RISC OS is not a central part of Pattotek's business plans. He also hoped that RISCOS Ltd would back the RISC OS Open project.
He added: "As you know, I have believed for some time that the only possible future for RISC OS is by opening up the sources for the whole community to participate in its growth and development and I'm delighted agreement has been reached, and a mechanism put in place to achieve this.
"Whilst we have to be realistic about the prospects for the resurgence of RISC OS, ROOL's plans at least give it a chance and I'm hopeful a number of new business opportunities for everyone will emerge because of this.
"If successful, the embedded market will certainly grow, with resultant benefits for the desktop market, especially if RISCOS Ltd were to see the real opportunities here and get behind what ROOL are doing."
Opponents of an open source RISC OS argue that time and money are needed to effectively develop the operating system, and previous efforts to open up parts of the OS, such as !Printers, failed to take off.
RISC OS Open website
Previous: Drobe writer in nuke protest arrest
Next: RISC OS 6 Select 4 preview released
DiscussionViewing threaded comments | View comments unthreaded, listed by date | Skip to the end
Please login before posting a comment. Use the form on the right to do so or create a free account.
Search the archives
Today's featured article
Java and RISC OS
Nick Brown explores the state of play and future options
47 comments, latest by em2ac on 28/09/07 12:34AM. Published: 19 Sep 2007
Cybervillage finally loses it
Loses the /acorn/ that is
8 comments, latest by moss on 14/10/02 6:45PM. Published: 8 Oct 2002
News and media:
RISCOS Ltd •
RISC OS Open •
MW Software •
Advantage Six •
CJE Micros •
Liquid Silicon •
Chris Why's Acorn/RISC OS collection •
The Register •
The Inquirer •
Apple Insider •
BBC News •
Sky News •
Google News •