"Any development is good development" -- probably so, yes. The point is that Martin is completely dissing RISC OS developers, then chucking out stuff like Flicker and actually expecting /payment/ for it! How many versions of RISC OS and how many configurations has that been tested on, I wonder? Does it still work on RISC OS 2? If not, why not? As rjek says, there's very good reasons to move onward and forget RISC OS limitations of the past. Progress is progress and if you don't want it, stick to stuff produced in the era you /did/ like. [RISC OS 2 has a charm long since lost, for example].
Anyway, this particular nonsense argument of Martin's coupled with the Beagleboard work it's hijacked beneath, has me wondering; what exactly IS "RISC OS" now/immediate future. I mean, what do people value most? Being able to run their 1995 issue of Impression, unmodified? (Not on a beagle you won't). Or just the desktop/filer/UI in general? (Which is prettymuch all beagle is likely to offer without some serious rebuilding of major apps from [probably lost] source and dead companies). Do people actually value any apps, or could we design a RISC OS API/UI-alike on, say, x86 and not care about silly ARM chips any more (They have few redeeming features really). How about what MacOS has done, sitting the same kind of UI experience on a completely different OS core?... People still think it's MacOS. What's beagleboard really trying to achieve other than "wooyay look what we COULD have if there were still developers". A feature-slim OS on its own is prettymuch worthless.