AMS: "What ROL have can't readily be adapted to RISC OS 5"
Oddly enough, Jack used almost exactly those words when he gave his presentation at ROUGOL last night.
Castle and RISCOS Ltd *have* talked about ways and means of co-operation, but seem to have reached the mutually acceptable conclusion that neither will gain much by trying to re-transplant one company's development plans over the top of the other.
Surely the userbase is better off accepting that reality, and pushing forward further development of RISC OS functionality, which is what Castle are offering - rather than diving into the politics of which company armchair critics believe should own which company.
As blahsnr quite rightly said, ROL are developing RISC OS 4 and are likely to make most of their sales through PCs with emulators (plus the A75 that isn't really aimed at the ordinary user), and Castle are developing RISC OS 5 that is aimed at the end user who wants to use real RISC hardware. It's a neat split, and it all makes sense.
What may start to upset people (perhaps has already?) is Castle increasingly stepping into Acorn's shoes. Selling tens of thousands of systems with RISC OS on real ARM hardware means Castle end up with vastly more resources and influence than anyone else in the RISC OS market, and the small players may quite understandably feel threatened.