You appear to have missed my point entirely. The fact remains that it makes no difference what fancy new features ROL or CTL add to their versions of the OS. Developers will generally try to (or have to in order to make a project viable) cater for the lowest common denominator. Alas, this is RO3 or RO4.0x. (hence my point about the lack of developments relying on new APIs in Select) . Those using Select are not "wallowing in the past" as I was careful to point out. I would contend, however, that it is those users running RO3 or 4.0x who are. If this platform is to move forward, a concerted effort is needed to move those users onto newer OS versions - be that RO5 or Select (I really couldn't care less which option they choose). How this is to be achieved is anybody's guess, however. The alternative, of course, is for the extra features to be made available for older OS versions though I feel that this works around the issue rather than solving the root cause.
As I stated before, the fork in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. API divergence is. What I don't really understand is the assumption by many that APIs will be different. If CTL have any sense (and it appears they do) any functionality they add to OS5 which duplicates that in Select would have the same API. If that doesn't happen, then as heds has already said, we can wave goodbye to any sensible future for the OS in the desktop arena.