"It is probably impossible to over-state the gratitude that RISC OS computer owners have for a piece of software like NetSurf. However, unlike some users, I'm far from convinced of the wisdom of channeling all our resources into this application at the expense of wider innovation, experimentation and competition."
What nonsense. If you think that all of RISC OS's resources are being spent on NetSurf, then your platform of choice is even more doomed. You can count on the fingers of one hand regular RISC OS contributors to NetSurf. And Peter Naulls isn't one of them. Firefox is completely unsuitable for many of the machines people run NetSurf on, so unless people get their fingers out and buy A9s or Iyonixes, Firefox is a no go: and it's still painfully slow even on an Iyonix. I think NetSurf's much more usable than Firefox on RISC OS: even including the sites it cannot access. And we havn't asked for a penny off users: certainly not said "I've got this, you can have it if you give me a grand."
Other than that, I'm not entirely sure what this piece is meant to say: it has a few (mostly faulty) opinions thrown in, some vague history lesson, and no conclusions. Of one must go by the sub headline "Andrew Weston wonders how many brave developers RISC OS has left" then the answers are: There's more money elsewhere, the development tools are better elsewhere, the hardware and software is cheaper and commonly better elsewhere, they've grown up out of what these days is essentially a hobbyist system.