__/ [ John Bailo ] on Tuesday 20 February 2007 20:09 \__
>
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/02/with_open_xml_m.html
>
> >>>
> If you listened just to Microsoft, you'd get the strong impression that
> IBM was practically guilty of war crimes for its opposition to
> Microsoft's sweet, innocent Open XML document standard before
> international standards bodies. The truth is, as usual, something
> different. I have no doubt that IBM's support for the Open Document
> Format and objections to OpenXML bear some taint of competitive free
> enterprise. But, let's call a spade a spade, Microsoft's indignant
> protestations bear some taint of propaganda as well.
> <<<
Just ask yourself what Microsoft has in stake.
,----[ Quote ]
| "Information Worker" (which includes Microsoft Office, Microsoft
| Project, Microsoft Visio, SharePoint Portal Server CAL, Office
| Communications Server and OneNote) is responsible in 2006 for:
|
| * 26.5% of the revenue ($3,133 out of a total of $11,804);
| * 55.4% of the operating income ($2,150 out of a total of $3,881).
`----
http://beranger.org/index.php?article=2446&from=rss
To protect the monopoly, Microsoft is willing to go as far as corrupting
Wikipedia, lobbying around the world, and even attacking Big Blue, which
happens to make reasonable argument. It's not a vendetta. It's an assessment
that's based on the realities. Not ever 15-year-old implementation can be
turned, as in, into a standard. It's code, it's not a vendor-independent
protocol.
--
~~ Greetings
Roy S. Schestowitz | Apache: commercial software's days are numbered
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.15 0.33 0.54 1/119 3472
http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
|
|
