MavHC: given the climate over the last couple of years, would /you/ publically discuss your development plans? They have received much criticism from the userbase for NOT having a 32-bit version, despite working on this for some time. After all, the entire OS can't exactly be extensively re-written, 32-bitted and changed to work on new hardware in 1 or 2 months! Even the timing between S3 and this announcement is probably too short (remembering A6 are offering release of the A9 to customers now, albeit not the desktop market).
Announcements /were/ made along the lines of 'we're working on something. We'll tell you about it when we can'. It was also announced for some time that 32-bit work was in gradual progress whilst doing Selects 1, 2 and 3.
The problem was that when more specifics are presented publically, companies in RISC OS land (and I'm not just talking ROL here) will be held to account to the nearest day and forever quoted on the subject ad nauseam. This is precisely why Select components are never pre-announced - it's a 'pay for development' scheme. It's also why you never see pre-announcements any more from Castle, STD and other significant parties until the product is commercially available.
In times of a more united userbase, there probably would be more pre-announcements to arouse interest. However, experience has clearly demonstrated this is counterproductive for many companies who now choose to do their development in private.
In answer to George: the article is clearly stating that development was entirely independent of Castle, I would take that at face value.