 |
 |
| ActiveWin | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise | VBA in Excel | Users Online: 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Network |
|
ActiveMac |
|
ActiveWin |
|
ActiveXbox |
|
DirectX |
|
Downloads |
|
FAQs |
|
Interviews |
|
MS Games & Hardware |
|
Reviews |
|
Rocky Bytes |
|
Support Center |
|
TopTechTips |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows Server 2003 |
|
Windows Vista |
|
Windows XP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
Apple/Mac |
|
Xbox/Xbox 360 |
|
News Search |
|
XML/RSS Newsfeeds |
|
Pocket PC Site |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows Vista |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows Server 2003 |
|
Windows XP |
|
Windows 7 |
|
Windows 8 |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox 360 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Xbox/Games |
|
Fable 2 |
|
|
|
Applications |
|
Windows Server 2008 R2 |
|
Windows 7 |
|
Adobe CS5 Master Collection |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Microsoft Express Mouse |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Interviews |
|
Mike Swanson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Advertise |
|
Affiliates |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
 |
ISO and IEC approve Office Open XML document format standard | |
|
||
| Time: 12:16 EST/17:16 GMT | News Source: Ecma International | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
The International Standards Organization (ISO) and International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) have approved ISO/IEC DIS 29500, Office Open XML File Formats as an International Standard. Approval requires at least 2/3 (i.e. 66.66 %) of the votes cast by national bodies participating in ISO/IEC JTC 1 to be positive; and no more than 1/4 (i.e. 25 %) of the total number of national body votes cast negative. Both of these criteria were achieved, with 75 % of votes cast by national bodies participating in ISO/IEC JTC 1 being positive and only 14 % of all national votes cast being negative. Open XML is a platform-independent open standard for word-processing documents, presentations and spreadsheets. The standard has been widely adopted by hundreds of organizations throughout the industry, and serves to ensure the long-term preservation of documents by maintaining compatibility and fostering continuing advances in the field of documents and information technology. Independent software vendors, including Apple, Corel, Microsoft and Novell have already shipped implementations of the Open XML standard within popular applications such as iWork, iPhone, WordPerfect, Open Office and Microsoft Office 2007.
|
||
|
Read Only Comments Return to News |
Displaying Comments 1 through 38 of 38 |
This is an archived static copy of ActiveWin.com. |
| #1 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 12:44:56 PM |
| There is room for both formats. |
| #2 By 52115 (66.181.69.210) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 01:00:15 PM |
|
Microsoft zealots around the world are singing praise..
Open-source persons are cursing the ISO.. Off-topic: I just wonder how much money all this has cost Microsoft? And then also, is Microsoft going to have an "Office-Only" version in which the format will only be fully supported is you're using MS Office suites? This post was edited by Winux on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 at 13:02. |
| #3 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 01:05:40 PM |
|
#1: No, there isn't in this case. MS blatantly cheated, and ISO sits and does nothing. I hope the EU is watching all this play out. Microsoft's OSP is vague and does not cover any open source implementations (as per usual with MS, but for an ISO file standard?!?!?!). This post was edited by Latch on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 at 13:08. |
| #4 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 01:20:50 PM |
|
#2: I just wonder how much money all this has cost Microsoft?
It costs MS a lot less money than the money they stood to lose if they lost out on contracts that stipulated an ISO-approved file format. is Microsoft going to have an "Office-Only" version in which the format will only be fully supported is you're using MS Office suites? Wait & see. Office 2007 doesn't implement OOXML the way it's specified by ECMA. And due to the undocumented representations in OOXML, and the patents its encumbered with, it's likely that nobody will have an implementation as good as Microsoft's (including no open source implementattions at all because of the language in the OSP)... whoops, looks like another case of embrace, extend & extinguish, except this time MS is doing it to its own format. MS will be able to claim its file format is an ISO standard, as per gov't requirements, but nothing is preventing MS from extending OOXML any way it feels like, regardless of what ISO does. Extending OOXML will give MS an automatic advantage as it keeps its competitors scrambling to keep up. Does any of this sound like a 'standard' to you? Perhaps, 'standard' operating procedure for Microsoft. |
| #5 By 92283 (64.180.201.131) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 01:34:17 PM |
|
Latch ... you are not only a loser, but you are a poor loser.
The IT World is the big winner. Avoiding the crappy ODF is fantastic. |
| #6 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 01:45:49 PM |
|
What part of Microsoft's position being centered on the technical merits of the standard is not understood here?
While so many played politics (look at the countries so set against it), Microsoft stuck to the technical considerations only. That is, or should be, the posture the ISO maintains. By allowing their work to speak for them, Microsoft succeeded and in a world where standards are more important than they once were, the company and its products are evolving in a manner that is more consistent with open standards in general - as the standards themselves mature. The rules were "sort of" spelled out and Microsoft played by them and candidly, the ISO had no real choice but to follow its own example and stick to the technical merits attending the process. Many others clearly didn't and if I may offer as an opinion, it does seem that those behind ODF wanted Microsoft to obviate much of the value in its own products by adopting ODF as the standard while underwriting free office suite versions with decades of work and billions of dollars. It is clear to me that a socialist mentality drives such thinking - and I fully expect the EU to act accordingly - working to extract every dime from every private citizen and company it can - as it continues to purchase support for a professional class of elitist politicians more interested in preserving their own power and influence than they are the wellbeing of individuals. Such behavior isn't competitive and it isn't good for the majority of people living under the jack-boot of despots determined to enslave all of us. If anyone politicized the process, it wasn't at Microsoft's initiative - it was a select group of ideologues bent on destroying what should, and in the end, remained a purely technical process. |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 02:06:56 PM |
|
#6: What part of Microsoft's position being centered on the technical merits of the standard is not understood here?
Funny, the past two years when I've tried to debate you on this very topic, you claimed ignorance. Suddenly you're an expert now? While so many played politics (look at the countries so set against it), Microsoft stuck to the technical considerations only. You have got to be freaking kidding me. Perhaps you missed all the stories over the past year of MS partners showing up en masse all over the world to vote in favour of OOXML? Did you miss all the stories about irregularities around the world, all seemingly in Microsoft's favour? I think you're suffering from classic Freudian projection. By allowing their work to speak for them, Microsoft succeeded and in a world where standards are more important than they once were, the company and its products are evolving in a manner that is more consistent with open standards in general - as the standards themselves mature. Nonsense. MS allowed it's money & influence speak for it, as well as untold numbers of partners and others willing to tow their line. The form letters sent out by MS to its partners is just one of many things MS has done. Gates has called Mexico and a few other countries to lobby on OOXML's behalf, ferchissakes, and yet you are trying to foist the whopper that MS didn't play any politics??? The rules were "sort of" spelled out and Microsoft played by them and candidly, the ISO had no real choice but to follow its own example and stick to the technical merits attending the process. The ISO rules are very well spelled out. What was unusual was how the rules were frequently bent or broken to the sole benefit of Microsoft. MS blatantly gamed the system and the evidence is all over the place, at least it is for those who aren't wearing Redmond-coloured glasses. Many others clearly didn't and if I may offer as an opinion, it does seem that those behind ODF wanted Microsoft to obviate much of the value in its own products by adopting ODF as the standard while underwriting free office suite versions with decades of work and billions of dollars. "Many others" gamed the system while MS played fair? Really? Can you name once such entity out of the "many", with an example of exactly how they did what you accuse them of doing? It is clear to me that a socialist mentality... blah blah blah anti-EU rant here... Yes, because the EU is all about screwing over poor Microsoft. Damn the EU!! Why can't they just ignore their own laws like in the US and leave MS alone? I've got to hand it to you, you spin as well as any of the MS people. This post was edited by Latch on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 at 14:13. |
| #8 By 2231 (72.5.151.4) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 02:31:25 PM |
|
Norway's yes-to-OOXML may tip the vote in favor of accepting it as an ISO-standard, but the committee chairman faxed a formal protest to the ISO.
80% of the committee voted against changing Norway's vote from No with comments to Yes. If I didn't know better I would think the voting was managed by Robert Mugabe's cadre. |
| #9 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 02:40:54 PM |
|
And IBM was virtuous through all of this?
Come on Latch, lobbying is part of the voting process. When the ISO shot down MS in the first vote, you were extolling them, now they’re a bunch of corrupt officials who were paid off by MS. Where is the proof of these payoffs? |
| #10 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 02:52:57 PM |
|
From the Brian Jones link above:
"Last year we sponsored a translator project that gave people the ability to read and write ODF files from Microsoft Office. Last month we announced that we would update the Office product so that the ODF translators could natively plug into Office and give people the same options they get from the other file formats. People will be able to set ODF as the default format in Office if that's what they want by simply installing the translators and then changing their settings." So what's the problem???? |
| #11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 03:23:13 PM |
|
#9: I have no facts regarding IBM's bad behaviour as you allege during this process. Do you have any? Lobbying is certainly not part of the process, and even Ketchum knows that. And, for the record, I never called ISO anything you claim I did. ISO is a victim in all this as well, as it did not forge its rules to account for a destructive presence such as Microsoft. If you stuff committees with your own people, there are no officials to bribe.
#10: What's the problem? What's the relevance is a better question. |
| #12 By 92283 (64.180.201.131) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 03:25:33 PM |
|
#7 "Perhaps you missed all the stories over the past year of MS partners showing up en masse all over the world to vote in favour of OOXML?"
People VOTED!!!!!! Oh my god!!!!! Didn't they know that VOTING is wrong in the openheaded world? #8 "Standard Norge sent the proposal out for public inquiry there were 47 comments, where 38 said yes to the proposal and 9 said no." 38 to 9 in favor is not 80% against. http://notes2self.net/archive/2008/04/01/standard-norge-responds-to-allegations.aspx |
| #13 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 04:00:45 PM |
|
Latch, Socialists EEEEEE "Red Fascists" very often use subterfuge to continually hammer home their positions. So yes, sadly, I have seen and read the propaganda you elect to regard as fact. I've also read and studied the technical detail and both studies do not support what you assert.
A lot of time has passed since you began to work yourself into a lather over this issue - certainly enough time to study the matter carefully, which I have since the foam started dripping from your lower lip. I do admit that as the debate heated, your missives contributed to my interest. I chose to try and ignore the politics (not always possible) and focus on the facts. What I came away with was an understanding that it was not Microsoft that was working to subvert the process at all. Quite to the contrary, it was a mix of MS competitors, nation states hostile to the US, and socialist slavers that attempted to politicize the process. Again, focusing on the process and technical matters alone, OOXML has been adopted as an ISO. The process worked and the format is available for use. MS does not own it as they did earlier proprietary binaries. It is open for all to use. People will continue to vote with their dollars and developer energy (or not). Socialism has been defeated and free and open markets and ideas are in this context, safe (for now). Don't like it, don't use it. Use ODF if you like, I am sure if enough people do (based upon its own merits) ODF will succeed. If not, it will continue to be rejected in favor of other software. And by the by, this proves well that both closed and open SW can work well together. It also proves that at least in the minds of learned people, junk politics can be defeated. |
| #14 By 12071 (203.185.215.144) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 06:21:32 PM |
|
Can we stop calling it "lobbying" and just state what it really is... corruption?
Whether you're for or against this, buying votes is corruption nothing less so let's not try and look at this through rose colored glasses. Congratulations Microsoft for getting your way through corruption - it seems that people's opinions on your company's practices was way off base! Oh and propaganda isn't a socialist construct Lloyd - you of all people should know that... after all, if you say something often enough people will being to believe it... at least the less educated will. |
| #15 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 06:44:59 PM |
|
#14, Hi Chris, hope you are well.
That is exactly my point. Propagandists focused on the wrong things and while they were doing this, Microsoft addressed enough of the comments made to secure enough votes to secure passage. In this case the propagandists also happen to be red fascists and or socialists with an agenda that does not include support for free and open markets - much less individual liberty. If they had their way we'd all be running open office on one version of Linux or another - but the problem with that is that none of these would likely exist, because there would be no Windows, or MS Office for them to copy from.... so what then... "Big Chief" notepads and pocket pencil sharpeners? You're right, I remember very well what socialists did for people and so do you - it wasn't pretty and it didn't smell nice and it for dang certain didn't provide much that was interesting, much less entertaining. |
| #16 By 2231 (72.5.151.4) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 07:21:55 PM |
|
#12 Here is the content of the fax sent by Steve Pepper:
Formal protest regarding the Norwegian vote on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 I am writing to you in my capacity as Chairman (of 13 years standing) of the Norwegian mirror committee to ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34. I wish to inform you of serious irregularities in connection with the Norwegian vote on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (Office Open XML) and to lodge a formal protest. You will have been notified that Norway voted to approve OOXML in this ballot. This decision does not reflect the view of the vast majority of the Norwegian committee, 80% of which was against changing Norway’s vote from No with comments to Yes. Because of this irregularity, a call has been made for an investigation by the Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry with a view to changing the vote. I hereby request that the Norwegian decision be suspended pending the results of this investigation. Yours sincerely, Steve Pepper Chairman, SN/K185 (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 mirror committee) |
| #17 By 82766 (202.154.80.82) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 07:38:59 PM |
|
@Chris - so you want people to stop calling it "lobbying" and to start calling it "corruption"? Using your own definition of lobbying, the American government is then one of the most corrupt governments in the world.
America has entire business structures based around lobbying, er, corrupting government structures. Why should we REALLY care if lobbying took place? It happens all the time. Just look at the current election process in America right now with Clinton and Obama? They use THREATS and PROMISES to voters every day! In the end, PEOPLE will decide for themselves and vote one way or another. Lobbying... Google does it, Apple does it, IBM does it and yes Microsoft does it. So its nothing new at all... and I'm only talking in reference to the IT industry, let alone other industries! For me, I'm happy that OOXML has become a standard. I would be just as happy if ODF *ALSO* became a standard. To me, it doesn't really matter in the big picture. People have CHOICE. If they WANT to use OOXML then they'll use. If they WANT to use ODF then they'll use that. If they WANT to keep using the "old" Microsoft Office file formats, they'll keep using them. To me, thats the ONLY important message here. Anything else is just bloated self-importance chest beating! |
| #18 By 1896 (207.244.165.105) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 08:51:21 PM |
| #17: are you so sure that people will decide who the winner is? Among super-delegates and the way the party in power, no matter which one is, manipulate electoral district etc. I do not find Presidential election to be so democratic. One person= one vote this should be the idea; 100 million people go out and vote? The first two candidates with the highest number of vots go to a second election and people vote for one or the other; this is democracy. |
| #19 By 12071 (203.185.215.144) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 08:57:31 PM |
|
#17 "the American government is then one of the most corrupt governments in the world."
A good argument could be made there I'm sure. Do you honestly believe that America's government is somehow special and immune to corruption? Is corruption something that can only occur in non-capitalist non-democratic countries? The only reason I ask these questions is because your response seems to be one of shock, like you're surprised that someone would equate lobbying to corruption when they are in fact one and the same. "America has entire business structures based around lobbying" So I guess you answered your own question in regards to corruption then... "Why should we REALLY care if lobbying took place? It happens all the time. " So it's not corruption because it occurs all the time and for the most part it's "water off a duck's back"? Have you perhaps taken a step back and thought about why it's such an accepted practice? That perhaps it has at least something to do with the fact people call it a nicer word like "lobbying"? Heck, why don't we call it "encouraging"! "Lobbying... Google does it, Apple does it, IBM does it and yes Microsoft does it." So your argument now it that it's ok because others do it too? Interesting set of ethical values you seem to hold up. Does the "others do it too" argument apply across the board or is on only for a few select topics? "For me, I'm happy that OOXML has become a standard." That's great! I didn't mention OOXML itself in my original post, I was referring to the way in which the standardisation process was bought off and making a point that calling it lobbying is a poor excuse. Call it what it really is rather than sugar coating it - the fact that there's been a formal protest shows, once again, how unethical Microsoft is as a company and once again displays that people's opinions of Microsoft as an unethical company aren't completely baseless as the pro-MS camp would have you believe. Speaking of OOXML, it doesn't fit my definition of an international standard. Anything that isn't implementable is not a standard let alone an international standard. And that goes for any standard going through ISO, not just ones Microsoft tries to push through with purchased votes. "People have CHOICE." People have a choice regardless of it being ISO or not - unless of course there's a mandate out for any choices to be selected based on ISO status. But you know that, that's why Microsoft pushed so hard to ensure it was approved. And so they should have - it was and is in their best interests (and those of their shareholders) to do so. "If they WANT to keep using the "old" Microsoft Office file formats, they'll keep using them" If you honestly believe that then you really don't understand software in general let alone Microsoft. Microsoft, like any software company, wants you to purchase the latest and greatest versions of their software. Your choice to use the "old" office formats will be more or less dictated by the business partners you have and the software they use. Once there is enough shift to the new office formats amongst your business partners, your "choice" will be selected for you. Anyways, it's time for lunch... have a good one guys! |
| #20 By 92283 (64.180.201.131) at Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:29:13 PM |
|
#16 Actually, the commitee voted "no with comments' which it condsidered a condition yes.
"Standard Norge had earlier decided to vote “no with comments” even though the national hearing resulted in a clear yes. The conclusion was thus considered to be a conditional yes, which we also stated in press release August 31. 2007" Steve Pepper appears to be a liar who made up his mind a long time ago to vote no. |
| #21 By 92283 (64.180.201.131) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 01:27:40 AM |
|
China, Cuba, Iran, South Africa and Venezuela are among the 10 that voted against OpenXML.
No wonder kabuki and latch are disappointed. |
| #22 By 92283 (64.180.201.131) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 01:30:10 AM |
|
"Microsoft’s request for rapid approval of its standard in early 2007 produced an intense lobbying campaign by I.B.M. and Sun Microsystems, which had helped develop a rival interchangeable document format called Open Document Format."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/02/technology/02soft.html?ref=worldbusiness Be honest Kabuki. Your heroes lobbied against Microsoft and lost. You aren't against lobbying by your buddies like IBM, Sun. You are against Microsoft. Period. |
| #23 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 09:57:50 AM |
| #13: That's got to be both the funniest and saddest thing I've read all week. The news has been rife for the past year with stories of MS corruption at the various NBs - to the point where the mainstream press was writing about it - but in the land of Saint Ketchum of Redmond, everyone else was dirty while poor Microsoft stayed true and fair. I don't know what to say to that. How do you debate someone who is so disconnected from reality? The hard part is trying to decide if you even believe yourself or not. Honestly, you reminded me of the Iraqi Info Minister who denied US tanks were in Baghdad, meanwhile the tanks are rolling by the camera in the background. And, please, don't use this to go off again about the red commies, evil Europe etc. in some parkkker-esque distraction technique as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. |
| #24 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 12:21:05 PM |
|
#23, You’ve tried that nonsense before... come up with something new.
Seriously, you're going to try and tell us that the beliefs and attitudes of people, companies and governments are not factors weighing on the decisions that they make? This from a person who's "beliefs" so motivate him as to work to embarrass Microsoft and others at every turn - to achieve some larger goal.... and beliefs and ideology have no role? Most interestingly, Microsoft leveraged this so well... they drew upon the reality attending it, and then turned it - by retreating into technical detail and the ISO's own charter. It was masterful. At least give them credit for that. You don't have to like a thing about any one person or company to respect them for what they can do. In this case MS's technology was better, but so was its strategy and tactical execution - they won. Against many challenges they prevailed. Why can't you just say, "well played" and move on? |
| #25 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 01:15:19 PM |
|
#24: You’ve tried that nonsense before... come up with something new.
Sorry, but I'll keep replying every time I detect your usual pro-MS, anti-reality posts like the ones in this thread. Seriously, you're going to try and tell us that the beliefs and attitudes of people, companies and governments are not factors weighing on the decisions that they make? People's "beliefs" have no place in a technical committee evaluating a proposed ISO standard. Most interestingly, Microsoft leveraged this so well... they drew upon the reality attending it, and then turned it - by retreating into technical detail and the ISO's own charter. Close, but not quite right. They leveraged all right; they leveraged their partners and sympathetic companies to join the various NBS and vote based on fealty to MS and not on technical details, as you keep alleging. Genuine technical document experts all spoke out against OOXML, and only the politics of MS stuffing the NBs saved the day for them. It was masterful. At least give them credit for that. You don't have to like a thing about any one person or company to respect them for what they can do. It was certainly masterful and they have my respect. I also respect the mafia. In this case MS's technology was better, but so was its strategy and tactical execution - they won. Perhaps in all your vast research, you somehow missed that this was not about ODF vs OOXML. This was about a document format ISO certification process, and not about whether MS's technology was better or worse than anything else. Against many challenges they prevailed. Why can't you just say, "well played" and move on? Microsoft cheated, plain & simple. There were many documented instances of their cheating, and now some of the countries standards bodies, and even government minister, are asking how their respective NBs arrived at their conclusions, and whether MS acted improperly. Why can't you admit that? Of course, I already know the answer to that one. After a few years of debating you, you would sooner go to your grave than to ever publicly admit that Microsoft did anything wrong. |
| #26 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 01:32:36 PM |
|
“People's "beliefs" have no place in a technical committee evaluating a proposed ISO standard.”
Latch, that is the most asinine thing you’ve ever said! In a world of robots your statement would be true. But as humans, all of our decisions are colored in some way by our beliefs. |
| #27 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 02:04:02 PM |
|
Latch, say what you will...
Look at this list, Of the 87 votes, 10 opposed the standard: Brazil, Canada, China, Cuba, Ecuador, India, Iran, New Zealand, South Africa and Venezuela. Of 87 countries voting, the ten above voted against. Now... tell me the politics of these nations was not a factor - at the same time you will tell me that the likes of IBM and Google and Sun DID NOT lobby against Microsoft! Politically, the 10 nations above despise the United States - and any person who has a lick of sense understands that Canada has a far closer affinity with GB than they do the U.S. They like our money, sure, but our nation? They despise us and any honest person from CN will admit it. Sorry CN, just pointing out that apparent friends may not actually be very friendly... and I for one, am willing to admit when we're not well liked. It isn't mutual, as we tend to like all people, because we're largely ignorant and believe that all people must want to believe as we do. Dumb... I know... but it is how we tend to see the world. We need to learn to not need to be liked at all. Oh... we do it among ourselves, too... it's weird. We like to see people succeed and then watch them fail... dopey! Business is a contact sport down here and too few people understand it/us that way. I don't and I get my butt kicked all the time. |
| #28 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 02:13:14 PM |
|
Latch, not about ODF?
You know that you will never get away with that one... Of course it was. It was all about forcing Microsoft to underwrite shovel-ware that no one wants. It was all about ODF and the people, companies and Govts. behind that formant who wanted Microsoft to fund their ascension. OOo and ODF are and have been free, yet MS Office dominates despite its costs.... and MS is to what... give up the farm and allow OOo and its supporters to benefit from decades of work and billions of dollars in R&D, and sales and marketing resources? Nuts! The politics detractors attempted to insert fell as squarely on its backside as the ODF formant and OOo have. Now you're going to pretend that they are injured and noble parties? Laughable. Man, put your helmet strap on and rub some dang dirt on it. You lost. There will be another game and you can try again, but this one is a done deal. |
| #29 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 02:28:45 PM |
|
#27: Latch, say what you will...
I will, and I can count on you continuing to avoid addressing anything I've said. At least you're smart enough to not defend the indefensible too much. Just gloss over the whole corruption thing, and instead you put on your tinfoil hat and see conspiracies everywhere. Politically, the 10 nations above despise the United States - and any person who has a lick of sense understands that Canada has a far closer affinity with GB than they do the U.S. So why didn't Canada vote Yes, just like England did, if we're so aligned with Great Britain? Um.... Plus, as far as I know, 5 of your 10 are not enemies of the US. Or is there some US-NZ cold war going on that I'm unaware of? Also, I loved your little debate trick here: "They despise us and any honest person from CN will admit it." Yes, of course. Honest people would agree with you, and anyone who disagrees must therefore be dishonest. Uh-huh. You don't have a clue about Canada, do you? Have you spent more than 10 seconds in Canada in the past decade?? I live here, always have, and to the best of my knowledge, nobody I know despises America. Quite a few of us despise that idiot you have in the White house and the foreign policy he pushes, but that isn't America, is it? But go ahead and feel sorry for yourself if it makes you feel better. Here's another take on your conspiracy theory: by wild coincidence, the majority of those countries on your list are not susceptible to MS's "Stack The NB With Partners" game. Might that be why they voted no, because they weren't stuffed with MS puppets voting yes? This post was edited by Latch on Wednesday, April 02, 2008 at 15:32. |
| #30 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 02:51:43 PM |
|
#28: Latch, not about ODF?
You know that you will never get away with that one... Of course it was. No, it wasn't. It was about MS not losing out on the gov't contract gravy train, nothing more. It was about an immature standard being rammed through a fast track process inappropriately. It was about letting MS get away with the creation of a standard that nobody but them can fully implement, and then corrupting voting bodies to get the results it wanted. It was all about forcing Microsoft to underwrite shovel-ware that no one wants. Wha??? Bizarre. Have a look around the web for the total number of ODF documents versus OOXML documents. Considering how no one wants ODF, as you claim, there seems to be a whole lot of ODF documents on the web compared to virtually zero OOXML documents. It was all about ODF and the people, companies and Govts. behind that formant who wanted Microsoft to fund their ascension. ODF is already an ISO standard and has been for years now. Governments & companies are already using it. What 'ascension' are you talking about? The politics detractors attempted to insert fell as squarely on its backside as the ODF formant and OOo have. Now you're going to pretend that they are injured and noble parties? Laughable. No, what's really laughable is how you're trying so very hard to spin this completely 180 degrees. I know I've already asked you once, without reply (as expected), but I'll ask again: do you have any evidence whatsoever to back up your claims? I can provide lots of evidence of committee stuffing by MS, phone calls from Bill Gates to various country's presidents on behalf of OOXML, general chicanery like committee heads ignoring their own people's advice and voting for MS etc. Can you provide anything at all to back up your claims? Anything at all? Man, put your helmet strap on and rub some dang dirt on it. You lost. There will be another game and you can try again, but this one is a done deal. We all lost, yourself included. You just don't realize it. And this fight is certainly not over. MS may think it can cheat its way to whatever it wants, but even mainstream people are starting to see. At least you're right on one single thing: this fight isn't over. |
| #31 By 92283 (142.32.208.232) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 03:36:41 PM |
|
"ODF is already an ISO standard and has been for years now"
1.0 is less than 2 years old. 1.1 (fixing some of the inadequacies in1.0) is less than 1.5 years old but is not an ISO standard. 1.2 (attempting to fix more inadequacies) is due next year. "OpenDocument 1.2 is currently being written by the ODF TC. It will include additional accessibility features, metadata enhancements, spreadsheet formula specification based on the OpenFormula work (ODF 1.0 did not specify spreadsheet formulae in detail, leaving many aspects implementation-defined) as well as any errata submitted by the public. Originally OpenDocument 1.2 was expected by October 2007 but now is expected to become an OASIS standard around September 2008 and a new ISO/SEC version by summer of 2009" No spreadsheet formulas in the specification??? ODF is craptastic! This post was edited by NotParkerToo on Wednesday, April 02, 2008 at 15:50. |
| #32 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 06:05:19 PM |
|
Latch, there is a question that so far, no one is asking: if ODF were exposed to even a small measure of the scrutiny that OOXML was, would it have been voted as an ISO at all?
This is interesting to ask - since reps form the NL said in part, "the specification is too big" (opposite OOXML) - perhaps because OOXML does include support for things like spreadsheets! |
| #33 By 15406 (99.224.112.94) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 06:27:36 PM |
|
#33: Latch, there is a question that so far, no one is asking: if ODF were exposed to even a small measure of the scrutiny that OOXML was, would it have been voted as an ISO at all?
No, the question that needed to be asked was asked, but yet again you failed to provide any supporting facts to your claims. ODF was already scrutinized by ISO, and it survived that scrutiny without resorting to subverting the process around the world. Now, about the supporting data for your claims about a global conspiracy against OOXML...? |
| #34 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at Wednesday, April 02, 2008 07:24:43 PM |
|
Latch, it is all polictics, Part 4 of the OOXML specification identifies separate 573 extension points whose functionality is unspecified. Grep for extLst. This is "documented?" Indeed, the only reason Microsoft can claim conformance is that the spec is so poor that it allows vendor-specific extensions to be deemed conformant. ODF suffers from the same fundamental flaw.
Sun does the same thing. Google has done the same on ODF and so has IBM. Sun for example, has added 1500+ extensions to ODF which itself falls short of its own stated design goals, which will not meet the requirements of the ISO until version 1.2 In very simple terms, the spec is dreadful and fraught with errors and contradictions. That does not matter as much as the practical considerations at hand. MS Office and the enormous volume of documents which exist in that format presented a requirement for a standard format which could easily read in old formats and then be saved in an open standards based formal - OOXML. That's the practical requirement. Microsoft's position centered on the technical details around that. Sun, IBM and Google, ignoring their own extensions to their chosen format, attempted to gain favor for their own formats by supporting ODF - regardless of how blatantly obvious it was that they were lobbying in their own interests. So it is all politics really - some favoring the many, and in the case of ODF, elevating the few at the expense of the many. That is something elitists are very good at ... all while hiding behind the idea of a socialist utopia. In the case of OOXML the political argument was won by not talking politics at all, but by addressing the technical questions raised. As I have said, MS schooled all. It was masterful and brilliant. So what if some don't like it... it is what it is and MS and the very young and naive US didn't make the rules... |
| #35 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Thursday, April 03, 2008 07:53:55 AM |
|
#34: Once again, please provide some backing data for your claims. Nebulous speculation about what Sun or IBM may have done is not quite good enough. I will reiterate that I have hard facts that Microsoft cheated its way into ISO. You claim that Microsoft played fair, and everyone else around MS was cheating. I await your supporting data, if you actually have any. And, please, do not dodge this question again or it will be conclusive that you were talking out of your butt.
In the case of OOXML the political argument was won by not talking politics at all, but by addressing the technical questions raised. As I have said, MS schooled all. It was masterful and brilliant. So what if some don't like it... it is what it is and MS and the very young and naive US didn't make the rules... OK, here you're just either flat-out misinformed, or lying. Tell me, was all of your exhaustive research on this issue done exclusively via MSDN blogs? Because the reports from people who attended the BRM all indicated that there was nowhere near enough time to address all the problems, leaving 98% unaddressed. It was decided to vote anyway and just fix the myriad problems in the maintenance phase, which is a bizarre position for a candidate for the fast-track. So, to sum up your position, you claim that Microsoft played fair & by the rules, despite all the evidence to the contrary, and Microsoft's competitors launched a dirty political campaign against OOXML, despite your complete and total lack of evidence or backing data. Good thing you're not a lawyer. |
| #36 By 92283 (64.180.201.131) at Thursday, April 03, 2008 11:03:18 AM |
|
Norway has already shot down Latchs lies.
Now comes Germany: http://notes2self.net/archive/2008/03/31/din-responds-to-quot-incorrect-and-misleading-quot-reports.aspx "The reports currently circulating the Internet regarding voting procedures in DIN's Standards Committee on Information Technology and Selected IT Applications (NIA) on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 "Office Open XML file formats" are false and misleading." IBM, Sun, Groklaw and Latch have beclowned themselves with lies about voting irregularities. None of those lies are proving to have any facts in them. |
| #37 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Thursday, April 03, 2008 11:46:57 AM |
|
#36: Corrupt body accused of corruption denies they're corrupt. Film at 11.
Their vote was 7 to 6, with 7 abstentions. I wonder how many of the 7 YES votes were Microsoft partners...? At any rate, there are plenty of other examples. I'm sure you'll try hard to debunk them all, but you'll have to wait until someone else does the thinking for you and puts it online for you to link to. |
| #38 By 92283 (64.180.201.131) at Thursday, April 03, 2008 12:50:45 PM |
|
#37 What evidence of corruption exists (except in your bitter delusional mind).
I could wonder which of the 6 work for IBM. But in the real world, being a Microsoft partnet implies you have the most customers of Office suites, so they should get a vote. The minority ODF supporters should not be allowed to disqualify the people representing the majority. "there are plenty of other examples" All debunked so far. |
