On Apr 11, 7:32 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> ChangeLog: Microsoft wobbles on open file format support
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Perhaps Microsoft is feeling insecure about its chances of having its
> | own XML file format approved as an ISO standard, since lawmakers in
> | Texas especially seem to be leaning toward ODF, writing that the file
> | format must be "controlled by an open industry organization with a
> | well-defined inclusive process for evolution of the standard." Maybe
> | what Yates and Matusow really meant is that open file formats are
> | good (for Microsoft) only if they're issued and controlled by
> | Microsoft.
> `----
> http://community.linux.com/article.pl?sid=07/04/10/1353258&from=rss
Microsoft has a big problem at the moment. Users who are creating
word documents
to be reviewed by teams are often finding that OO users are looking at
scrambled displays.
This just makes everyone acutely aware of how horribly non-standard
Microsoft's "standards"
really are. The problem is likely to get worse as Office 2007 users
start pumping out garbage
documents that can't be read by anybody, including licensed Office 95,
Office 97, Office 2000,
and Office XP (aka Office 2003).
Meanwhile, here is Open Office, which can be downloaded over a high
speed internet link in about 5 minutes,
and installed in about 30 seconds. The documents created by this
software can be read by everybody on the team, including external
clients, internal team members using Windows, and even team members
using Linux.
For companies considering a migration to Linux, or companies doing
business with companies considering a migration to Linux, OpenOffice
offers a very quick and easy way to provide high quality documents
that can easily be read by any ODF compatible Office suite.
For those who want commercial versions, there is the possibility to
upgrade to Star Office 8.0, Lotus Workplace, WordPerfect Office Suite,
and probably a few others. The ODF document standard assures a
command and easily shared document format. The commercial products
don't try to corrupt the standard, they simply offer wizards, themes,
templates and macro libraries that make the existing systems easier to
use.
> Meanhile, GNU/Linux gets more standardised and consistent.
> Portland Project to meet again in June
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | On the desktop side, developers will be dealing with a variety of
> | issues, including such topics as drivers, WiFi, desktop virtualization,
> | and printing. The invitation list is a who's who of desktop Linux
> | among vendors, community Linux organizations, KDE, GNOME, and ISVs
> | (independent software vendors).
> `----
> http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS5607121029.html
Ironically, Linux has rapidly become the "Standard" for server
systems.
Today, most UNIX platforms strive to offer Linux compatibility. It's
much
easier to prototype a solution in Linux/OSS and then migrate it to a
larger
platform such as AIX, Solaris, or HP-UX, or even Z/OS, as the demand
and
budget allows.
Very often, a Linux prototype is even rolled out as a pilot product,
and
many parts of the solution remain on Linux as other, more critical
components
are migrated to the commercial products. Most new Oracle, DB2, and
Sybase
deployments are extensions to LAMP solutions.
> Related:
>
> Microsoft calls on UK public to raise the Office standard
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Microsoft is calling on the Great British public to join its campaign
> | to get the XML Office format adopted as an international standard.
Microsoft is campaigning everywhere to try and keep Microsoft's
monopoly
control of the industry intact. Much of this effort is defensive.
Many
governments and many corporations are beginning to take "OSS First"
policies. In some cases, erecting substantial barriers to new
expendatures
on Microsoft's monopoly oriented technology. Many companies now
provide FireFox to their employees. Many companies now limit,
restrict,
or even forbid the use of Outlook. In some cases, the burdon of proof
required to justify additional purchases from Micrcosoft essentially
require
that there be absolutely no other possible way of achieving equivalent
functionality using OSS or competitor products.
Some companies have converted their support contracts to outright
license
ownership. This includes the right to run Windows XP or Windows 2000
under
their original licenses. Microsoft office support plans have also
been converted to
licenses. The net result is that there are no further recurring
payments coming in.
Microsoft is hoping that OpenXML will generate revenue from Office
2007.
The problem is that Microsoft still has to deal with that problem we
just spoke of.
If you want to provide 1000 people with Office 2007 and Vista, you
have to spend
almost $1000 per person on hardware and software licenses, or about
$150/user
per month over 3 years on a support contract basis, in addition to
hardware upgrades
or replacements. That would be over $1 million per thousand users for
royalties
alone. Current laptop and workstation costs are typically $2000 and
$1500 respectively.
That means a company could spend up to $3 million per thousand
employees to
upgrade to the newest Microsoft software.
The problem is that there are now 3 other alternatives.
One is to stick with current versions of Windows 2000 or Windows XP
and use OSS,
including Firefox, OpenOffice, and current versions of Office,
eliminating the need
to continue to pay massive tribute to Microsoft.
Another is to begin a carefully planned migration to Linux, using
Virtualization to
smooth the transition from the Windows-only environment to a hybrid
environment,
and finally to a Linux-only environment. Ironically this is probably
the most popular
choice and the easiest to implement undetected.
Finally there is the option of biting the bullet and moving everything
to Linux.
Many companies are using this strategy to convert pockets of
workstations
and desktops. Common candidates are call centers, internal IT center
staff,
and secretarial workstations. Now that Linux has functional
replacements
for Project and Visio (Project Planner and Dia), even Managers are
beginning
to opt for Linux. Planner might not be as good as the Microsoft
versions,
but it solves one of the biggest problems of project planners -
maintaining up to date
plans by allowing all team members to see the plans and to provide
updates to the
plans as events require.
Microsoft knows that the days of the monopoly are numbered. On the
other
hand, they have to maintain revenue and profits in order to maintain
their stock
prices. Bill has already sold of millions of shares of Microsoft
stock, and will
very likely "cash out" over the next 2-3 years. Steve Ballmer has
also been
gradually cashing out. But in order to maintain stock prices,
Microsoft has to
convince mutual funds, institutional investors, insurance companies,
and other
large investment groups - to maintain their ownership of Microsoft
stock.
Vista/Office 2007 being released together is a huge gamble. If the
industry
rejects either, the total license revenue and service revenue could
drop as much as 20-30%.
Microsoft could cover that shortfall with revenues from other sources
such as web sites and
entertainment products, but neither of these are nearly as high
margin. Microsoft's profit margins
on revenue has been gradually dropping, over 20% since the release of
Windows 2000.
> | [...]
> | It is not clear if the UK is an opponent. However, a representative
> | of fellow member the Bureau of Indian Standards recently reportedly
> | complained to the IndiaTime.com over Microsoft's decision to dump
> | 6,000 pages of documentation on them.
> `----
This is, in effect what Microsoft tried to do to the ISO. They dumped
a huge pile
of documentation, mostly covering XML and XML objects, but witheld
most of
the same documentation that both the EU and the US DOJ have court
ordered them
to provide - the protocols and file formats used between Microsoft and
other computers.
The irony is that Microsoft is openly defying the courts in it's
refusal to disclose fundamental
documentation of it's existing products, and yet they also want the
ISO to adopt a standard
which is heavily dependent on undisclosed protocols - as "Standard".
The ISO is notorious
for rubber stamping corporate products as "standards", but endorcement
of 1/2 of a standard
which is incomplete in it's specification - is even too much for the
ISO.
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/04/microsoft_office_standards_pe...
> Microsoft Fights for OpenOffice XML Standard Approval
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | To win approval, Microsoft must obtain 75 percent of all
> | votes cast.
> | Organizers have said they expect representatives from about
> | 100 countries, including the United States, Canada and most
> | large European and Asian nations, to ultimately cast ballots
> | on the issue.
Again, one of the biggest problems for Microsoft is that Microsoft
has refused to disclose, even under court order, even the most
fundamental
protocols - including protocols which are invoked by OpenXML.
OpenXML describes the envelope for the binary content, but does not
document the binary content itself. With almost no effort at all,
the OpenXML envelope can be used to propogate viruses even more
efficientnly than Outlook and IE.
Microsoft's reputation for corrupting standards then refusing to allow
anyone to disclose those corruptions is well documented. And nearly
all of these corruptions have resulted in security vulnerabilities
that
allow perpetrators to inflict their malware and cover their tracks.
Microsoft appealing to the ISO to adopt a Microsoft standard is a bit
like
Charles Manson not only asking for parole, but also asking that all of
the conditions of parole be waived, including the ability to carry
lethal
weapons, drive, travel unmonitored, and not have to report to a parole
officer. Every year, Manson is granted a parole hearing. He knows
he's
never going to be paroled. He knows that the hearing is just a
formality.
At best, it might help to keep him from engaging in even more violence
and inappropriate behavior between the parole hearings.
Microsoft knows that it has almost no chance of getting the approval
needed,
but the diversion and the attempt make it possible for Microsoft to
get more
orders for Office 2007 and Office support contracts - rather than
losing that
market to OpenOffice, StarOffice, and Lotus Workplace (among others).
> http://www.linuxinsider.com/rsstory/56642.html
>
> Microsoft's Open XML Format Advances in ISO
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Andy Updegrove, a partner with Boston law firm Gesmer Updegrove and
> | editor of the ConsortiumInfo.org standards blog, said that 14 of 20
> | responses were clearly negative, two indicated divisions of opinion,
> | three were inconclusive or neutral, and one offered no objections.
> `----
> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2110684,00.asp
This isn't exactly the kind of feedback you want. When a reviewer
offers
no objections, it just means he hasn't properly reviewed the document.
The documentation provided by Microsoft doesn't even meet the
requirements
to be considered a complete standard. It would be like requesting a
patent on a
chemical compound, without listing the actual number of each kind of
atom and it's
arrangement in the compound chain.
|
|
