Enough (too much) was written about the Omega pre-launch. We decided that we wouldn't review until:
1. All pre-orders were satisfied;
2. the critical aspects of the Omega were all running satisfactorily.
Doing this means that a review will either silence the critics of the ARMTwister or show that it doesn't work. Either way we get a proper answer and an end to damaging comments.
If we all work together then the winner is RISC OS; if we don't then RISC OS (ie all of us) loses.
There's plenty of work for everyone to do - including a couple of months of buying from the AMSs to catch up on!
I missed it earlier but someone mentioned the 'fact' that ROL refuse to consider a negotiated settlement. Has anyone bothered to ask Castle and ROL if either of them has ever suggested (or refused) mediation (maybe earlier this year) - or if either of them would accept it now?
My information so far suggests that 'fact' is way off beam.
To Michael Stubbs:
Please get up to date before making very silly statements. Check on the A75 and the potential for immediate sale of thousands of RISC OS-on-ARM machines into a new market. Of all the RISC OS developers, Advantage Six (STD) is the one we can least afford to lose if we want a future.
The RISC OS market could cope with the loss of Castle more easily - though some might find it difficult to accept the Omega as the only top RISC OS machine.
No-one seems to have picked up the naive comment from page 1. Even if castle own the whole of RISC OS that doesn't mean they can do what they like with it. ROL paid over 100K for rights to RISC OS. That's money spent by the dealers by purchasing shares in ROL. I understand that some bought something like 5000 shares (ie costing them 5000 pounds). I believe Castle bought 500.
Those shares, that money, went into producing a future for RISC OS. RISC OS 4, Select, Adjust and work specific for specific hardware was the result. The work continues.
No matter who owns RISC OS they have to abide by the terms of the agreement/licence that RISC OS own as do ROL themselves and anyone producing RISC OS products for sale in the market defined in the agreement.
Castle say that ROL has breached the terms of that licence. ROL deny that.
ROL say that Castle had previously breached the terms of that licence. Castle deny at least one of those breaches.
Whatever is the case it is *not* true that Castle can do whatever they want with the bits of RISC OS that they own.