Posted on 09/29/2005 6:03:01 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
David Berlind over at ZDNet wrote a remarkable article called Did Microsoft send the wrong guy to Massachusetts' ODF hearing?. If you missed this article, you'll have missed the equivalent of what Intel's Andy Grove called an inflection point. This one has the potential to have more impact than the release of the first Pentium processor.
...
Microsoft has essentially alienated the rest of the IT industry. I can't remember a single company that had so many people working in harmony against it, including IBM at the height of its arrogance. The Java Community Process provides just one example of an industry working again a company.
(Excerpt) Read more at onlamp.com ...
Why do you think it's a mistake? I'm not trying to be obtuse, I just can't see how the public loses by having documents in a format not tied to and under the control of a particular entity. Again, as I've pointed out several times, Microsoft is as free as anyone to introduce a product that reads and writes this format, whether the software package itself is open source or proprietary. So where is the problem if other (perhaps as yet unknown) products have an equal opportunity to be able to read the files?
Which was exactly MY point, Mr. Red Cloak, even though you'd like to somehow twist it into yours.
Um, no, this mandate, or whatever you want to call it doesn't "mandate" the use of a particular brand of software. It doesn't even exclude a single vendor, not even MS (if they comply with the format standard). It just says that the docs have to be in an open format, presumably to give the creator or recipient potentially MORE choices of software with which to read and manipulate the files. How is this burdensome?
Give him a minute to clear his head, when one spins as much as trolls do on this thread they need a minute to figure out exactly what it is they are saying...
It's not. It makes a lot of sense because this way they could share documents between Linux, Sun, Apple and MS. As long as the application supports odf, it can be read.
I don't think MS will lose out too much by this, most people who use "MS Office" will still use it if they can save the document in open format. People aren't going to give up a product they use now if they don't have to.
Last I heard MS was not going to support an ODF format, thats why this is an issue at all MA. Microsoft XINO formats do not meet the definition of Open formats..
As I've clearly stated on several previous occasions, I'm more concerned with data portability than open source code.
I'm pro-business, but I also demand a fair deal for the taxpayers. Microsoft has been screwing the American public by locking government data into their proprietary, undocumented, non-portable formats - which will cause major problems in the future. If that practice continues, it will be a bigger problem than Y2K was. It's time to put an end to that scam.
I thought I saw something about that in the thread about the new "Vista" release a few weeks back. I think, but might be wrong, that the new Office Suite would do that.
True. I can't see the circumstances arising, within the next century, that would cause this, but it makes sense in the very long term.
A memo isn't the same thing as implemented policy, and it would seem that in the two years since, it hasn't become policy. Also, requiring all software used by the state to be Open Source isn't the same thing as standardizing on a single document format.
According to the announcement that came out this past week, Office 12 is supposed to be using ODF.
Paul
I'm not exactly sure about this, but I think that the binary information has to do with the document formatting, so you can ignore the binary part if you don't care about the document looking differently than how it was intended.
Because it's another disingenuous attack on our existing software vendors like Apple and Microsoft by liberals attempting to make all software free. Both of those companies products already support multiple open standards, this is just a moving target that never will be good enough for those in Mass, until all the Apples and Microsofts of the world are gone, replaced by leftist loons like Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation.
By mandating a completely unproven and extremely obscure format, they are limiting access to their docomentation by most all users, so your supposed point is beyond ridiculous.
Except that it has a binary part to it, which isn't open or easily readable. I think that the binary part only has to do with formatting, and not with the content, but it's still not completely open.
The incompatibility acutally lies with the "free software" GPL license, which forbids compatibilty with any format that includes patents,
Software with a BSD type license wouldn't have this problem, but still, why should documents made by the state, made with taxpayer money and made for the taxpayer, be in a patent encumbered format? Why shouldn't the public be able to use any software they want to read documents made by the state? What's more, the royalty-free license from Microsoft is (as far as I know) only for reading their documents. What if a citizen or non-governmental entity wants to do some sorts of transformations on the government documents, instead of just reading it? The government distrubiting information in a format which is patented just seems like a bad idea to me.
How, since every open source fanatic that pushes the "Open Office" clone claims the proprietary "Microsoft Office" formats have been legally reverse engineered, and their free alternative offers complete compatibility? Have all those claims been a lie?
No it's completely published, royalty free, and available for use by anyone. The incompatabilty lies with those using GPL software, which has the restriction in it.
How, exactly, can the GPL "break" the US patent system? Those who write software which is under the GPL can't use patented algorithms/formats/etc because of their own license; it doesn't somehow magically allow protect those programmers from being sued if they used something that's patented.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.