On Jun 12, 6:42 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> State's move to open formats not a mass migration
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | And Microsoft itself lobbied heavily against the original open formats
> | policy after it was announced by the ITD.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | The slower-than-planned adoption of ODF in Massachusetts appears to
> | have influenced state legislators in Texas who recently quashed a
> | bill calling for the use of open document formats -- one of five
> | such proposals that have been defeated or shelved in the U.S. this
> | year following strong opposition from Microsoft and its allies in
> | the IT industry.
> `----
>
> http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2007/060807-states-move-to-open-format...
The article is a bit more specific. Microsoft released a plug-in
which allows Microsoft Office to save documents in ODF format. Only
250 of 50,000 machines have had this plug-in installed.
No indication of how many of these machines now have Open Office
installed in addition to Microsoft Office.
When MA state CIO Louis Gutierez first proposed ODF, he was ready to
reccomend that the state discontinue the Microsoft "Support program"
for Microsoft Office, and proposed that OpenOffice be installed as a
replaceent for MS-Office.
After intense lobbying from Microsoft, a more moderate policy was
adopted, which allowed these 50,000 computer users to continue to use
MS-Office, but also permitted them to install Open Office as well.
Since Open Office was free, it was easy to download, cost nothing to
license, and made it possible to easily convert MS-Office documents to
ODF documents. Furthermore, the MS-Office documents could be fixed up
and saved in MS-Office formats that could be read by both OpenOffice
users and MS-Office users.
One of the key drivers for ODF was the need for support for people
with disabilities, especially blind workers and users, who needed
content "read" to them. There were numerous readers which could
"read" the ODF content. On the other hand, the Microsoft solution had
not been good enough for what was needed.
> In some countries, choosing open (and free) formats for
> citizens to access information is more important than a
> corrupt company's cash cow.
>
> Related:
>
> MA Governor-Elect Names MS Anti-ODF Lobbyist to Technology Advisory Group
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | That person is Brian Burke, the Microsoft Regional Director for
> | Public Affairs, and if that surprises you, it surprises me as well,
> | given the degree of acrimonious debate and disinformation witnessed
> | in Massachusetts over the last 15 months involving the Information
> | Technology Division's transition to ODF.
> `----
One of the objections raised by Microsoft in public hearings was that
it had not been represented on the committee, which then forced the
decision to be reviewed in a big public hearing. It also meant that
high ranking officials had to make time in their schedules to allow
Microsoft to make personal and direct pitches (and threats and bribes
and whatever else it took). Putting a "Microsoft Guy" on the TAG
eliminated this headache.
The "Microsoft Guy" couldn't persuade the TAG to abandon ODF, but he
could bring the concerns to Microsoft. When Microsoft realized that
they were still losing the case for ODF, they offered a plug-in to
convert MS-Office documents to ODF formats. The hope being that they
could keep Open Office off of some of the 50,000 desktops.
Appearantly, the Plug-In hasn't been all that popular. Not sure why
that would be. Perhaps Microsoft has additional licensing
restrictions, or the ODF generated by Microsoft isn't entirely
"compliant" - which means that OpenOffice and other ODF based viewers
and editors can't properly display/edit the generated documents.
Hopefully some of the issues will be made public soon.
> http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=2006112...
Microsoft "bet the farm" on Vista and Office 2007. If the market
accepts 2007 the way they accepted Windows 95 or Windows XP, then
Microsoft could dominate the market for another 10 years. If Vista
lands more like Windows NT 3.x and Windows ME, Microsoft could have a
serious problem.
After all, when Microsoft released NT 3.1 they could announce a new
version of Windows for the following year and people would believe
them. Linux was available in 1993, but was difficult to install and
only ran on a few limited configurations.
When Microsoft released Windows ME, they were releasing it to appease
the court, and to demonstrate that a "Court managed" release would be
a disaster for the company. They had XP waiting in the wings, and
"Force Fed" it to CIOs and OEMs when it was released about 14 months
later.
This time, Vista has to live up to almost 5 years of "hype", and has
some very aggressive competition. Reviewers are saying "I'd rather
have a Mac". Some reviewers are also saying "Even Linux is better
than Vista".
Office 2007 has an even bigger problem. It's being released into a
market which has been seeded with almost 300 million copies of
OpenOffice. If Microsoft tries to go for it's typical $300-$700 price
tag, and tries to demand $50-100/month in "support" costs for Windows/
Office/Project/Visio support packages, they could be facing open
revolt. Massachusettes will not be the last IT organization to say
"No more money for Microsoft".
Many companies have already decided that it's better to order a PC
from an OEM who will give them XP Professional OEM edition and pass on
the Microsoft "corporate support program", than to pay hundreds of
dollars per user per year for "support" that pretty much amounts to
"restart, reboot, replace, reinstall, reimage". Most corporate
customers have had no Root Cause Analysis from Microsoft, and aren't
allowed to do it themselves.
In fact, it got so bad that many companies just maintained an
inventory of replacement machines - because it was cheaper to send a
new PC or new hard drive, than it was to attempt to have desk-side
support try to "fix" the problem.
I've noticed that the price of Vista machines on retail shelves has
already dropped from about $2000 to about $450 at Staples. Something
tells me that the days of Vista Home edition (Basic or Premium) are
numbered. It may even be that the days of "Vista Only" machines on
retail shelves are also numbered.
Apple can't keep Mini-Macs on the shelves, and makes good profits on
their high-end Macs. Vista vendors have stale inventory that isn't
selling even at over 50% off. And Microsoft has to face the OEMs for
license negotiations that have to be completed by the end of July. In
the past, Microsoft has offered discounts on Windows licenses in
exchange for exclusionary terms designed to lock out competitors.
This year, I don't think that OEMs are going to be terribly interested
in a $20 percent drop in Windows prices if they have to sell the
machine for a 50% discount - only 4 months after Vista was released.
Microsoft will HAVE to play nice with OSS, including OpenOffice and
Linux. The OEMs are about ready to demand the ability to put Windows
and Linux on the same machine, in a configuration of THEIR choice, and
put this new system on retailer shelves. They want Beryl, they want
XGL, they want Linux. If Microsoft wants to come along for the ride,
they will buy the Windows licenses for all of the machines, but on the
OEMs terms, not Microsoft's.
Let's face it, if you are losing $1000 per machine in profit, compared
to your competitor (apple) because Microsoft has turned your hardware
into a commodity, then a $10 discount on a $30 license just doesn't
seem like that much of a bargain.
Perhaps this is why Microsoft is inking deals with Novell/SUSE and
Xandros , and courting others - even paying THEM to take the deal.
|
|
