To me the AIF checking is a good thing that can help the stability of software and ensure that RISCOS has more stability. However , I tend to agree that it's introduction could have been handled better. ROL should be congratulated on making the step to further increase the stabity with 4.42 but they should have consulted more before doing so. As the article points out there are countless applications that will fail the test and some are not actively supported so that a cohesive plan should have been discussed with the few developers left in the market place.
I do disagree with some of the tone of the article as well but this seems a progressively and sad feature of recent RISCOS debates.
I hope that further work can be done in a sense of co-operation as we do need to move RISCOS forward in a number of areas and if we can't then I fear the market will be in terminal decline sooner rather than latter and that saddens me.