I remember reading somewhere, and I don't remember where exactly (maybe on CHUD), which said that Singer was going to learn from his "mistakes" that he made on Superman Returns
and that his proposed Battlestar Galactica
reboot was not going to have any legitimate ties to the old 70's show or the Ron Moore incarnation for that matter.
That would probably be the sagest approach since it has become apparent when filmmakers try to make movies out of nostalgia homage that it ends up suffering as a result (if you take into consideration the lackluster reception to both Superman Returns
and Peter Jackson's King Kong
remake - even though I actually enjoyed Returns
Singer is a self-proclaimed science-fiction fan and he's already professed his love for Star Trek (I believe at one point he was even putting together a pitch for a Star Trek TV show, before Abrams' movie - he even had a cameo appearance in Star Trek: Nemesis
). John Orloff, the writer who was just hired, is clearly a big science-fiction and Battlestar Galactica fan himself. So I don't really see a need to get worried about this particular incarnation of the project. It seems to be in good hands.
In terms of the passage of time after Ron Moore's show, as others have said Hollywood reboots properties at a pretty quick and efficient pace. I don't think audiences really seem to mind, since they have embraced some of the reboots so far - at least the ones that haven't sucked. If Singer and Orloff can manage to deliver a good movie then I think we have nothing to worry about. Which is basically all we really should be concerned about- whether or not the movie is going to be any good.