OS users' generosity and desire to see a future for their platform, and effectively used Select subscribers' subscriptions as if they were charitable donations 'for the good of the platform', providing precious little genuine innovation in return. It's disingenuous and unethical behaviour for an organisation that is supposed to be a for-profit company. RISCOS Ltd have always had an impossible task ahead of them -- RISC OS is effectively a dead platform and has been for years -- but I think one of the most fundamental problems has been Paul Middleton himself. At best he's proven himself to not be a natural businessman; at worst, a bumbling incompetent. Why do people put up with it? Message #111828, posted by pnaulls at 22:47, 7/11/2009, in reply to message #111827 Member Posts: 317 for an organisation that is supposed to be a for-profit company. I don't know if that was a typo or not, but ROL have always promoted themselves as a non-profit company, with RISC OS itself being the priority. Perhaps they should have been better off being a charity, but I think the laws on that in the UK have changed a bit over the last decade. Anyway, my feeling is that this approach was always going to fail - at least if the aim is to make money, then there's going to be real products that customers want, and there should continue to be money to push in certain directions. The result may be a slightly narrow focus, but