Posted on 09/29/2005 8:52:01 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
The broader media usually take little interest in public policy debates about technology, but they’re missing a big story in Massachusetts.
The technology trades, blogs and industry are buzzing about a monumental policy shift in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Officials in the state have proposed a new policy that mandates that every state technology system use only applications designed around OpenDocument file formats.
Such a policy might seem like something that should concern only a small group of technology professionals, but in fact the implications are staggering and far-reaching. The policy promises to burden taxpayers with new costs and to disrupt how state agencies interact with citizens, businesses and organizations.
Worse, the policy represents an attack on market-based competition, which in turn will hurt innovation. The state has a disaster in the making.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Dear Mr. Quinn:
I am writing on behalf of Sun Microsystems to support and applaud the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on the publication of the Public Review Draft of the ETRM v3.5. Both the process and the outcome provide thought leadership for the public sector across America and around the world.
We feel that requiring the use of an office document format, OpenDocument 1.0, which is standardized by a public process, completely free of legal encumbrances, already implemented in multiple products, not controlled by any one vendor, and on its way to being an ISO standard is enlightened and will pay long-term benefits to the citizens of Massachusetts. These benefits include preserving office document accessibility to the widest audience and for the longest term; an affirmation of the value of open standards in preserving choice and interoperability in software applications. This is also evidence of the soundness of your Enterprise Open Standards Policy (http://www.mass.gov/Aitd/docs/policies_standards/openstandards.pdf) which outlines your rationale for adopting open standards.
Some may contend that the decision is unfairly dictating a software preference. This is entirely wrong; the guidelines make it clear that any applications need only support an open, unencumbered document format. Your guidelines do not limit any vendor's ability to compete for state business because the required open formats are available equally to all,and participation in their development is equally open to all.
In closing, we'd like to thank the Commonwealth for including us in this process. Please don't hesitate to call on Sun again in future.
Sincerely,
Scott McNealy
Chairman and CEO
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
The OpenDocument standardization process also included many document users, especially those with the need to handle complex documents or to be able to retrieve documents for long periods of time after their development. Document-using organizations who initiated or were involved in the standardization process included (alphabetically):
* Boeing (complex large documents)
* CSW Informatics
* Drake Certivo
* Intel (complex large documents; they are developing sample documents as a test suite)
* National Archive of Australia (retrieve documents long after development)
* New York State Office of the Attorney General (complex large documents retrieved long after development)
* Society of Biblical Literature (large multilingual documents, long-term retrieval)
* Sony
* Stellent
I don't think he does have any practical experience. I had a discussion with him a little over a year ago on the issue of open source security and injected some elements regarding public key cryptography into the discussion. Sakes alive...ol' Buzzy was as confused as an infant in a topless bar.
More name calling in support of your liberal causes.
More insults in support of liberal causes.
"Tin Turkey"? "Brass Buzzard"? Sounds like NSA operatives. LOL
What's the upside of changing systems?
No surprise, doesn't make the points he made wrong.
Doesn't make 'em right, either. But it sure does make 'em biased.
...but you don't care about that, do ya Buzzy? Nahhh...you were hoping for a Redmond shill echo chamber, weren't ya? *snicker*
That's right I export PDF file from open Office all the time.
Open Office is a little buggy sometimes but I like it. When it crashes on me The doc recovery is excellent. I can't complain it's free!
Actually it's important as the lines are becoming clearer between who is a liberal and supports policies like Mass's, and who doesn't.
Sssh!! Don't mention the NSA around Brass Buzzard. He think they're Communist dupes because they also use (looking furtively side to side)...Linux.
I don't think this is the big deal that some would like to think it is.
Most people don't care about who makes their document editor. What people want is a standard. They want to be able write something up and send it to somebody else and have them read it and edit it, probably even send it back for same. That's all.
If MA sets a standard that doesn't work outside of their little boundary... even they will stop using it in order to get work done. If it does work, then nobody will care.
The original posting tries to pass this off as MERELY a Fox editorial...but now we know it's something much more (or less, depending on the perspective).
And dude...you're still clueless.
You and Bush2000 are gonna simply have to learn that if you post to incite you will get batted around.
That's funny, since as usual you and the bunny are the ones doing all the hysterical shrieking. Sucks when you get stuck on the side of the libs up in MA I guess.
Socialist governments really go for the free stuff. Cuba...China...Massachusetts...
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.