On Mar 12, 6:44 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Microsoft guns Open XML onto ISO fast track
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Rajchel wrote that she decided to move Open XML forward after consulting
> | with staff at the International Technology Task Force. She did not
> | mention that the 6,000-page proposal, submitted by another standards
> | body, Ecma International, had garnered comments and criticism from 20
> | out of the 30 countries sitting on the JTC-1 committee.
> `----
>
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBas...
>
> I wonder how many threats/briberies are going on there.
>
> Related:
>
> Q&A: Former Mass. CIO feels 'bittersweet pride' after battles with Microsoft,
> legislature
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | As CIO of Massachusetts from February to November last year, Louis
> | Gutierrez had to endure most of the brunt of Microsoft Corp.'s political
> | wrath over a state policy calling for the adoption of the Open Document
> | Format for Office Applications, or ODF -- a rival to the software vendor's
> | Office Open XML file format.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | Do you see any reason for there to be two standards? If you were
> | starting blank-slate, there certainly would not be value to creating
> | two separate standards. Over time, it has sometimes been useful to
> | have the competition of two standards to keep both sides honest.
> | But I don't see particular value in the long-term co-existence of
> | two separate standards.
> `----
>
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBas...
>
> From the previous CIO....
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Quinn: Almost to a person, to anybody involved or who knows about
> | the ODF issue, they attributed the story to Microsoft, right, wrong
> | or otherwise. Senator Pacheco may be a bully but I do not believe he
> | is disingenious and would stoop to such a tactic. Senator Pacheco and
> | Secretary Galvin's office remain very heavily influenced by the
> | Microsoft money and its lobbyist machine, as witnessed by their
> | playbook and words, in my opinion.
> |
> | Quinn: I believe that the ODF decision will stand. I believe MS
> | will continue to do anything and everything it can to stop it. And I
> | know my seat wasn't even empty and they (MS) took another shot at
> | the title, to no avail. This horse is out of the barn and I see no
> | way for it to go back in. Remember, all we are asking for was and is
> | for Microsoft to commit to open and the standards process; so
> | everyone looks really bad if the plug gets pulled at this juncture.
> `----
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060119232859729
>
> MA Governor-Elect Names MS Anti-ODF Lobbyist to Technology Advisory Grouphttp://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=2006112...
>
> The Sorry State of Massachusettshttp://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=2006111...
>
> Microsoft offers schools in Mass. free software (to stop ODF adoption)http://news.com.com/2100-7344_3-6090196.html?part=rss&tag=6090196&sub...
>
> Microsoft plays Massachusetts Senate cardhttp://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32515
>
> Politics and tech companies: follow the moneyhttp://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061110-8194.html
>
> Years of deadlock on EU patent bring some new thinkinghttp://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/08/business/patents.php
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | "A source that deals with the company said unofficially that Gates
> | proposed Microsoft's Digital Rights Management technology as a national
> | standard to fight piracy at the governmental level."
> `----
>
> http://www.kommersant.com/p719683/r_528/
>
> Leaked letter warns of open source 'threat to eco-system'http://www.techworld.com/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=7109
>
> Study: open source needs official support; Lobbyist disagrees with "flawed"
> conclusionshttp://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061017-8011.html
>
> Report Says Nonprofits Sold Influence to Abramoffhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/12/AR200...
>
> Open Source Foes In Bed With Abramoffhttp://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/12/2036223&from=rss
>
> EU official joins consultancy serving Microsofthttp://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?view=CN&storyID=2...
>
> US ambassador to the EU was former Microsoft lobbyisthttp://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34706
>
> US politicians go to bat for Microsofthttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/26/microsoft_eu_political_lobbying/
>
> Changing the Report, After the Votehttp://insidehighered.com/news/2006/09/01/commission
>
> When is a standard not a standard?
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | OOXML's method of dealing with the problem in effect locks out
> | all applications that are not Microsoft Office, whereas ODF's
> | method keeps the standard vendor neutral and usable by any
> | office suite
> `----
>
> http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/2110
>
> Microsoft playing three card monte with XML conversion
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Gary Edwards of the Open Document Foundation, a leading member
> | of its technical committee, says Microsoft is playing proprietary
> | games aimed at controlling XML file formats and preventing the
> | Open Document Format from gaining a foothold.
> `----
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=959
>
> Is Open XML a one way specification for most people?
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Who will implement Open XML correctly and fully? Maybe Microsoft.
> | Why? Since it is essentially a dump into XML of all the data
> | needed for all the functionality of their Office products and
> | since those products are proprietary, only they will understand
> | any nuances that go beyond the spec. The spec may illuminate
> | some of the mistakes that have been made and are now being
> | written into a so called standard for all to have to implement,
> | but I'm guessing there might be a few other shades of meaning
> | that will not be clear. Fully and correctly implementing Open
> | XML will require the cloning of a large portion of Microsoft's
> | product. Best of luck doing that, especially since they have
> | over a decade head start. Also, since they have avoided using
> | industry standards like SVG and MathML, you'll have to
> | reimplement Microsoft's flavor of many things. You had
> | better start now. So therefore I conclude that while Microsoft
> | may end up supporting most of Open XML (and we'll have to
> | see the final products to see how much and how correctly),
> | other products will likely only end up supporting a subset.
> `----
>
> http://sutor.com/newsite/blog-open/?p=1145
>
> Is Office Open XML A One-Way Standard? Ask Microsoft
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Way back in October, Bob Sutor, IBM's open standards guru, wrote
> | a piece on his blog where he described the Office Open XML
> | standard as a one way standard, because the format is so complex
> | and so geared towards compatibility with legacy Office compatibility
> | that it could never be implemented as a fully functional file format
> | by any competing personal productivity applications (PPAs) like
> | WordPerfect and OpenOffice. I agree with a lot of his points but
> | didn't feel compelled to write about it since the issue had been
> | covered pretty comprehensively in the blogosphere.
> `----
>
> http://blogs.adobe.com/shebanation/2006/12/open_xml_one-way.html
>
> Signs That Your "Open Standard" May Not Be Open Enough
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | If OOXML is an open standard, why must Mac MS Office users wait so
> | long for OOXML support? Correct me if I am wrong, but MS Office on
> | the Mac is developed by Microsoft themselves, how is it that the
> | Windows Office development team had access to the OOXML specification
> | but the Mac Office team did not?
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | Microsoft's ECMA submission comprised more than 6,000 pages. The
> | challenge of plowing through so much could drag out
> | approval by ISO. (ODF's submission was less than 700 pages.)
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | So, while Microsoft's own developers struggle to comprehend and
> | implement their own proposed "standard" file format, perhaps Mac
> | MS Office customers can use Novell OpenOffice for their Windows MS
> | Office compatibility needs.
> `----
>
> http://boycottnovell.com/2006/12/07/signs-that-your-open-standard-may...
>
> Novell's "Danaergeschenk", by Georg Greve
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | So in the case of OpenXML, Microsoft now seems to be using Novell to
> | put a pro forma implementation of OpenXML into OpenOffice.org, which
> | will make it easier to migrate from OpenOffice.org to Microsoft
> | Office but can never be sufficient to read all Microsoft Word Documents.
> |
> | One reason for this is the sheer size of the implementation; another
> | reason relates to the containers used within OpenXML, which make use
> | of Microsoft's proprietary implementations instead of industry
> | standards such as SVG. Moreover, there is really no knowing what
> | kind of hooks Microsoft has put into the specification that people
> | will not detect at first reading. Indeed, it is quite possible
> | that OpenXML will allow what Bruce Perens refers to as "Predatory
> | Pratices" in his definition of an Open Standard.
> |
> | And while there will be a migration path from OpenOffice.org to
> | Microsoft Office, Microsoft avoids opening the inverse path to
> | any other ODF-compliant Office program, by neglecting ODF support
> | in Microsoft Office.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | Bob Sutor, IBM's Vice President of Standards and Open Source has
> | written a good analysis why the specification is more akin to a
> | denial of service attack than an Open Standard. OpenXML
> | basically represents a change of strategy: Instead of trying
> | to hide information by not telling anything about their products
> | to anyone, they've apparently now switched to hiding information
> | in noise, which is by far the more effective method.
> `----
>
> http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061208135621706
>
> Sun slams Ecma's OpenXML OK
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | "Make sure you follow how well the Novell and Corel implementations
> | do," he wrote. "If they falter, watch out for those who try to blame
> | those companies or open source itself, when the root of the problem
> | may be with the Microsoft Office OpenXML spec in the first place."
> `----
>
> http://www.itweek.co.uk/itweek/news/2170681/sun-slams-ecma-openxml-ok
>
> The Way Forward -- Georg Greve Responds to Groklaw's Comments
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Make no mistake: the choice isn't between being able to interoperate
> | with Microsoft, thanks to Novell doing interoperability work for
> | them, or being stuck in some ODF ghetto, unable to read Microsoft
> | documents. Everyone wants to interoperate. The question is how.
> | The problem is Microsoft. The solution lies with Microsoft. They
> | need to get with the program and follow standards like everyone
> | else, instead of insisting the world bend to their ways.
> |
> | It's not normal or acceptable that we can't all freely share
> | documents with one another, no matter what operating system we
> | like to use. We can send each other email, even if you are on
> | Windows and I'm on Linux. Why isn't that the norm for
> | everything? It ought to be. The bottleneck is Microsoft. FOSS
> | software is happy to interoperate with any other software. Why
> | won't Microsoft?
> `----
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061212025314700#comments
I trust Microsoft more than I trust the Open Source Mafia.
|
|
