It is ALL ideological...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| stuartr Dec 04, 2005 11:51 PM EDT |
and must be. It is just a matter of what ideology you are talking about. Is it FOSS software only, or is it non-proprietary storage of data? Is it universal access, thru the persons with disabilities act (PWDA), or is it universal access, thru the yet to be written "I will not pay public monies in perpetuity to a private corporation for access to MY freakin public information stored in dis-functional MS meta-standards act" I have some sympathy for the article and its message, as an Engineer I always appreciate the realistic view. But I think the author is thinking too small. Massachusetts IS the "equivalent to a mid-cap company", what we need is a NATIONAL switch in ideology, away from 'ask not what your government can do for your corporation' thinking, and a return to a focus on the real customers of government - the people. We pay the taxes, we own the data, we elect these sycophants - not MS (at least in theory anyway). Unless you are supporting the right cause for the wrong reasons, NEVER appologize for your beliefs! YOU, WE, OWN the damn information that is encoded in these documents, and to have a corporation control the LANGUAGE we speak is rediculous! I really don't care if Word is the single most ubiquitous pile of crap word processor on the face of the planet, if I don't pay MS to licence it, I cant view documents I already own?!??! If MS told you tomorrow you will have to learn swalehili in order to read what is in your documents, I have a feeling most of us would tell them to get stuffed... so why do we allow them to tell us we will speak MSWord??? I still have no Idea what thats all about! Finally, a state that realizes what its mission is. Unfortunately they got shot down by a technicallity. Now before you go writing me off as an uncaring bastard, lemme tell you, I am an uncaring bastard. I don't care that OO.org does not support access by disabled persons. Thats right, I dont care... ya know why??? Because as the article states, most citizens will access the gov. docs thru PDF, well THOSE must ALREADY be accessable to the disabled. If they are not where is the hew and cry against PDF? If they are, what is the problem with ODF? Last I looked I could convert my odf to pdf when needed? If the complaint is about having to convert, ONE extra step, to PDF then go get stuffed as well. We built sidewalks, then we built wheelchair access into them. We built stairs, then we built ramps for wheel chairs. I am not unsympathetic to the handycapt, and I am aware that there was no intention of building curb-cuts or ramps when curbs and stairs were built, indeed they would NEVER have happened with out the PWDA, but you already cost the mainstream millions to adapt to your needs, all I ask is don't cost us BILLIONS in wasted software costs as well. I promise you if ODF sweeps the land, every company and his brother will support it - including ms - as well as the tools needed for universal access under the people with disabilities act. Then neither the state, nor you or I, will have to licence ms winbloz AND office, to produce, and view, documents we already OWN! And since I am pretty sure I already subsidise your purchase of MANY things - allowing you to afford to purchase Winblows, I don't care if you dont like my views. Stop taking my money, and buy winblows, with your braille reader, on your own... then we'll talk. |
| dcparris Dec 05, 2005 12:21 AM EDT |
To me, the real issue is that Microsoft is lying through their teeth in order to protect their stupid monopoly. They can support OpenDocument and should support OpenDocument. That line about them getting locked out of doing business in the state because the state wants ODF is an out and out lie! Will everyone please call them on it, instead of trying to analyze whether a different approach should have been taken? The world needs to know they are liars. The world needs to know it to the point they actually do something about it. |
| Abe Dec 05, 2005 6:40 AM EDT |
stuartr: Well said and to the point. It could have been excellent if it was not for the bad choice of some words. There are replacements that would have been more appropriate for public use. |
| stuartr Dec 07, 2005 11:44 PM EDT |
dcparris, The issue is not that ms is lying, anyone within earshot of an ms markedroid... er, employee, realizes they are hearing a lie - or should anyway. It is also not a stupid monopoly, it has minted some VERY RICH people, and many many merely rich people. It is the fiduciary responsibility of ms's management to preserve that monopoly by whatever "legal" means possible - including lying NOT-under oath (ethics be damned, this is business man), they owe non-stock holders exactly nothing. Even I don't begrudge them that, and hence the fact that they are lying is removed from even being an issue. Of course they CAN support ODF, but that would risk the corporate coffers - AND do away with their only bargaining chip against the adoption of ODF - since if Word is ok by the impaired, then word with ODF support would be fine as well. One real issue is why does ODF not support features for the impaired - if in-fact it does not? Since this is a gov. agency we are talking about here, whoever proposed ODF (either as a standard, or for implementation by the state) HAD to know that would be a requirement. And from my own original post, should the impaired have to put up with 'back of the bus' access to public documents even in the short term? No. But, in a perfect world, if they could all get together, rent out a big hall, and decide that they are going to tolerate such access in the full knowledge that ms will bow immediately to the loss of revenue (this assumes of course that ms does not employ any of the HK to file suit and stop it), I for one would be happy, well not happy, but less miffed, about the tax dollars that go to subsidize the handy-capt in modern society. I would go so far as to mandate that whatever money is saved by not licensing proprietary software (a switch not mandated by the document format, but a switch made POSSIBLE by the open format) be put to furthering whatever subsidies exist, and perhaps establishing expanded programs. I would sleep MUCH better at night knowing that some poor blind bastard could get a free braille page reader, because the DMV doesn't HAVE to pay ms whatever ms decides to store and access public information. Even if I were out of pocket the same amount of tax dollars. (BTW, when I say I'm miffed about the millions that go to programs for the HK, rest assured I am aware that this pales in comparison to the BILLIONS (even though I can't count that high... in this lifetime) being handed out in corporate welfare (Haliburton, et.al.) by this and, to a much, much, much lesser extent, other administrations. |
| stuartr Dec 08, 2005 12:14 AM EDT |
Abe, I take your point, cursing only distracts from a message. But man that's G-rated for me ;-) When I really get goin' the spits flyin, the F-bombs are droppin, and women and children are runnin for cover! My only defence (weak tho it may be) is that this issue would likely not pique a childs' interest enough to read even the article - let alone my reply, so I am really only talking to an adult audience - weak defence I know - and it still weakens my point. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!