- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Is ODF headed for a ‘Bill Buckner’ Moment?
|
|
|
Comments (13)
In Recap of Recent "ODF" Stories
He gets paid to write fiction. I'm responding soon enough with a nice blow-by-blow. ;-)
His writing is fairly devious, I'll give him credit for that. It's a style you often come across in newspapers as well. Easy enough to take in when skimming through, and it generally sounds plausible too, which is it's strength. However, if you pay attention or know the subject it's patently wrong. His ODF bilge is slightly better than his other writing, but only because it's a "new" topic and thus he doesn't have as many cliches to fall in to.
For example, in his other recent blog post (about global warming) he states:
"If you don't hate industry and human development and the free markets that best enable these phenomenon...."
"Of course for those who promote concern over climate change as a surrogate for energy rationing and wealth redistribution...."
But the last time I checked, Concern for the environment != Communism, although we've all heard that one a million times.
One of the most amusing things about such commentators is their complete lack of consistency when talking about government's waste of tax revenues. Subsidising established corporations is generally a sound investment, whereas even a tax credit for companies researching 'green' energy or the like is always the most heinous crime. Nevermind the fact that lots of such startups create new markets, and often get bought up by the incumbent companies and make them more money than ever before.
For example, in his other recent blog post (about global warming) he states:
"If you don't hate industry and human development and the free markets that best enable these phenomenon...."
"Of course for those who promote concern over climate change as a surrogate for energy rationing and wealth redistribution...."
But the last time I checked, Concern for the environment != Communism, although we've all heard that one a million times.
One of the most amusing things about such commentators is their complete lack of consistency when talking about government's waste of tax revenues. Subsidising established corporations is generally a sound investment, whereas even a tax credit for companies researching 'green' energy or the like is always the most heinous crime. Nevermind the fact that lots of such startups create new markets, and often get bought up by the incumbent companies and make them more money than ever before.
You have some good points here. I just wish that, for once, Titch would just deal with some factual information in his writing. Then we could have an actual debate. ;-)
You have to give Titch one thing: It's not as horrible as the previous ODF articles he wrote. You might have had an influence on him dcparris :-)
That doesn't mean it's not a FUD piece with with factual errors in it though. I added my thoughts on that to the Heartland page. I'll reproduce it here as well.
--
Quote: "it’s not the government’s role to handicap competitors — it’s a gross disservice to the citizens who expect their state executives to make purchases responsibly and fairly"
But it is a governments role to ensure that the procurement process is a level playing field for all competitors.
Microsoft's Office Open XML is not open. Microsoft has crafted a license around it in such a way that Open XML is not implementable by it's main competitors. If MA would allow Office Open XML as a standard the it would be stacking the deck in favour of Microsoft and against all other office products. It would do exactly what you describe above: "handicap competitors — [which is] a gross disservice to the citizens".
I don't know the exact US laws, but on this side of the pond it's illegal to stack the decks in a procurement process. Cf the procurement rules regarding processor speeds (AMD vs Intel) here in Europe.
I would be thrilled to see MS Office implement ODF. I really hope they do and I really hope that they enter the MA procurement process with an ODF compliant office suit. I doubt that MS has the sense to do so, scared as they are to loose the Office stranglehold on the market.
-- Sander Marechal
That doesn't mean it's not a FUD piece with with factual errors in it though. I added my thoughts on that to the Heartland page. I'll reproduce it here as well.
--
Quote: "it’s not the government’s role to handicap competitors — it’s a gross disservice to the citizens who expect their state executives to make purchases responsibly and fairly"
But it is a governments role to ensure that the procurement process is a level playing field for all competitors.
Microsoft's Office Open XML is not open. Microsoft has crafted a license around it in such a way that Open XML is not implementable by it's main competitors. If MA would allow Office Open XML as a standard the it would be stacking the deck in favour of Microsoft and against all other office products. It would do exactly what you describe above: "handicap competitors — [which is] a gross disservice to the citizens".
I don't know the exact US laws, but on this side of the pond it's illegal to stack the decks in a procurement process. Cf the procurement rules regarding processor speeds (AMD vs Intel) here in Europe.
I would be thrilled to see MS Office implement ODF. I really hope they do and I really hope that they enter the MA procurement process with an ODF compliant office suit. I doubt that MS has the sense to do so, scared as they are to loose the Office stranglehold on the market.
-- Sander Marechal
Sander:
> You have to give Titch one thing: It's not as horrible as the previous ODF articles he wrote. You might have had an influence on him dcparris :-)
That doesn't mean it's not a FUD piece with with factual errors in it though. I added my thoughts on that to the Heartland page. I'll reproduce it here as well.
In some ways it's worse. He should, by now have buckled down to some core facts and issues. Unfortunately - as you point out - he still deals with misleading information and avoids the core issues. Considering he's a senior research fellow, you would think he would know how to debate an issue. Which brings us back to your comment - he's simply writing FUD.
That doesn't mean it's not a FUD piece with with factual errors in it though. I added my thoughts on that to the Heartland page. I'll reproduce it here as well.
In some ways it's worse. He should, by now have buckled down to some core facts and issues. Unfortunately - as you point out - he still deals with misleading information and avoids the core issues. Considering he's a senior research fellow, you would think he would know how to debate an issue. Which brings us back to your comment - he's simply writing FUD.
He still gets it wrong.
The main way he gets it wrong is to gloss over the fact that Microsoft themselves chose not to support ODF, and therefore Microsoft have put themselves out of any purchasing decision. It can't be anti-competitive of Mass. when Microsoft take themselves out of the bidding.
The second way is that Microsoft's competing XML schema requires components of Windows - ActiveX for example. This means that any software application written to be compliant with Microsoft's proposed XML schema will have to be an application that runs ONLY on a Windows platform. Hence Microsoft's competing schema does not address the main concern of Mass. which was the ability to read documents well into the future even if the original vendor and platform on which they were created is long gone.
The second way is that Microsoft's competing XML schema requires components of Windows - ActiveX for example. This means that any software application written to be compliant with Microsoft's proposed XML schema will have to be an application that runs ONLY on a Windows platform. Hence Microsoft's competing schema does not address the main concern of Mass. which was the ability to read documents well into the future even if the original vendor and platform on which they were created is long gone.
Do you happen to have any links referring to this? I would sure appreciate anything you can point me to that addresses this very issue. I have had great difficulty finding anything specific that I could point to in support of this kind of argument.
To dcparris:
http://www.topxml.com/XML/re-34771_First-impressions-of-Open...
"A new draft of Open XML came out on my birthday. 4081 pages of PDF, and very impressive for anyone who has worked on specification and standards. Two things stick out: first how horrible XML Schema fragments are when stuck inline to document structure; second, how the implementation-neutral tone of the introduction is at odds with the elements for various kinds of Active X embedded objects."
On Google, searching for "Open XML" and "ActiveX" yeilds 22,000 hits.
ActiveX runs only on Windows.
http://www.topxml.com/XML/re-34771_First-impressions-of-Open...
"A new draft of Open XML came out on my birthday. 4081 pages of PDF, and very impressive for anyone who has worked on specification and standards. Two things stick out: first how horrible XML Schema fragments are when stuck inline to document structure; second, how the implementation-neutral tone of the introduction is at odds with the elements for various kinds of Active X embedded objects."
On Google, searching for "Open XML" and "ActiveX" yeilds 22,000 hits.
ActiveX runs only on Windows.
Further, from the horses mouth (Brian Jones' weblog)
http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2005/10/11/479808....
" # re: Microsoft Office Open XML Format does not require upgrading to Office "12" Wednesday, October 12, 2005 8:20 PM by BrianJones
Inquisitive - Steven Sinofsky (Senior VP for Office) sent a signed letter to the European Union directly addressing that very concern. We will continue to provide the licenses going forward and continue to represent everything in XML (other than obvious binary type structures like pictures, Active X controls, etc.). http://www.microsoft.com/office/xml/response.mspx"
HOLD THE PHONE!
ActiveX may be do-able on Linux via Wine, I just found out.
http://dot.kde.org/994747675/
It looks like they have done it for Konqueror web browser, so it might be possible to write an Office 12 clone to produce Office Open XML format documents on a Linux platform.
But my, what a kludge! This is hardly the way to go to try to produce a platform-independant, vendor-neutral and future-proof document format. ODF is miles ahead in terms of platform independence.
http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2005/10/11/479808....
" # re: Microsoft Office Open XML Format does not require upgrading to Office "12" Wednesday, October 12, 2005 8:20 PM by BrianJones
Inquisitive - Steven Sinofsky (Senior VP for Office) sent a signed letter to the European Union directly addressing that very concern. We will continue to provide the licenses going forward and continue to represent everything in XML (other than obvious binary type structures like pictures, Active X controls, etc.). http://www.microsoft.com/office/xml/response.mspx"
HOLD THE PHONE!
ActiveX may be do-able on Linux via Wine, I just found out.
http://dot.kde.org/994747675/
It looks like they have done it for Konqueror web browser, so it might be possible to write an Office 12 clone to produce Office Open XML format documents on a Linux platform.
But my, what a kludge! This is hardly the way to go to try to produce a platform-independant, vendor-neutral and future-proof document format. ODF is miles ahead in terms of platform independence.
Hey thanks! That's really helpful.
Let me see if I understand what you're saying... Assuming Open XML, exluding ActiveX, is certified and becomes an openly implementable format and will theoretically be around in perpetuity.
if it were to be implemented by MA ActiveX will also have to become an open standard, freely implementable in GPL'ed software and the like.
then MS will actually be enforcing on themselves precisely what they accuse the GPL of doing. Meaning something along the lines of their "The GPL is a viral license" PR campaigns, without even GPLing their software.
Woohoo! Another job well done MS!
Sadly, since assumptions are the mother of all cock ups, by throwing MA a flawed bone such as OpenXML and thus buying some time something along the lines of [new governor elected, office 12 comes out, offcials can be bought, homeland security directive requiring Office12 is passed, ...] will be more likely to occur.
Anyways, I'm looking forward to reading your rebuke dcparris, the last ones have been an entertaining read.
ABCC
if it were to be implemented by MA ActiveX will also have to become an open standard, freely implementable in GPL'ed software and the like.
then MS will actually be enforcing on themselves precisely what they accuse the GPL of doing. Meaning something along the lines of their "The GPL is a viral license" PR campaigns, without even GPLing their software.
Woohoo! Another job well done MS!
Sadly, since assumptions are the mother of all cock ups, by throwing MA a flawed bone such as OpenXML and thus buying some time something along the lines of [new governor elected, office 12 comes out, offcials can be bought, homeland security directive requiring Office12 is passed, ...] will be more likely to occur.
Anyways, I'm looking forward to reading your rebuke dcparris, the last ones have been an entertaining read.
ABCC
> Anyways, I'm looking forward to reading your rebuke dcparris, the last ones have been an entertaining read.
I'm sure you'll enjoy tomorrow's article. I didn't even bother with the XML specs - you'll see why. I may take on a separate article to address the "openness" of the two formats.
I'm sure you'll enjoy tomorrow's article. I didn't even bother with the XML specs - you'll see why. I may take on a separate article to address the "openness" of the two formats.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
We need an old-school superhero with a rolled up newspaper of fact to liberally beat anyone about the head with who writes about ODF then quickly switches rails to distract the reader. I'm thinking "The Tick" here.
What d'ya all think the motive is... merely creating story where there is none or something a bit more self serving?