Showing headlines posted by Andy_Updegrove

For a few years now we've been reading about the urgency of adopting open document formats to preserve our written records and heritage. Now, a 74 page report from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences warns that digital films are as vulnerable to loss as digitized documents, but vastly more expensive to preserve - as much as $208,569 per year.

One of the topics I'm behind writing on is the state of IPR concerns and standard setting in China in general, and the current status of UOF – China's "Uniform Office Document Format" entry in the document format sweepstakes – in particular. I recently spoke at two conferences in Beijing, and got back up to speed in this regard direct from the source.

Or so, at least, Google would like you to conclude. Significant differences include single-author control (but the freedom for other authors to set up competing pages as well), bylines for page authors, reader ranking, and - oh yes - Google ads (authors interested in allowing ad placements would get a "substantial" share of the resulting revenues).

As the date for the February BRM (Ballot Resolution Meeting) on ISO/IEC JTC1 DIS 29500 (a/k/a Ecma 376, a/k/a Microsoft OOXML) approaches, more and more attention is being paid to how Ecma will propose the disposition of the comments submitted during the general voting period. Yesterday, Ecma issued a press release that offers a bit of a peek behind the curtain.

In 1980, Microsoft was a small software vendor that had built its business primarily on downsizing computer languages created for mainframes to a point where they could be used to program the desktop computers that were then coming to market. In that year, its total revenues were $7,520,720, and BASIC, its first product, was still its most successful. In contrast, Apple computer had sales of $100 million in the same year, and launched the largest public offering since the Ford Motor Company had itself gone public in 1956. And ten years later? What a difference a decade can make.

This is the second chapter in a real-time eBook writing project I launched and explained last week. The following chapter on how Microsoft acquired its dominant position in a few products, and failed to succeed in others, is one of a number of stage-setting chapters to follow. Comments, corrections and suggestions gratefully accepted.

For some time I've been considering writing a book about what has become a standards war of truly epic proportions. I refer, of course, to the ongoing, ever expanding, still escalating conflict between ODF and OOXML, a battle that is playing out across five continents and in both the halls of government and the marketplace alike. And, needless to say, at countless blogs and news sites all the Web over as well. Well, I've taken the plunge, and if you are so inclined, you can help.

The ongoing circus that is the OOXML adoption process in ISO/IEC JTC 1 has helped expose the cracks in the traditional process. Unfortunately, while the consortia that set most IT standards are independent of the traditional process for most purposes, they still have to return to gain the types of global certifications that some governments look for. It's time for consortia to cut the cord completely, and form their own global organization.

ODF first made the headlines in Massachusetts when presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was its governor. Now, another presidential candidate has pledged his support for them as well. On November 14th, Barack Obama revealed his detailed IT plan for a more open and technically enabled government in a speech at Google's Mountainview campus.

Earlier this week the tech press was abuzz with the news that the OpenDocument Foundation had abandoned ODF for CDF, a W3C specification-in-process that few had ever heard of, and no one seemed to know much about (Microsoft was understandably pleased). To find out the facts, I interviewed Chris Lilley, the W3C lead for the CDF project, and his answer couldn't have been more clear: "The one thing I'd really want your readers to know is that CDF was not created to be, and isn't suitable for use as, an office format."

One of the enduring soap operas this year has involved the ongoing patent infringement threats by Microsoft against “Linux, OpenOffice, email, and other open source software.” According to Microsoft, 235 of its (unnamed) patents are being infringed, and it should be entitled to be paid for this use of its intellectual property. Steve Ballmer believes that Microsoft owes it to its stockholders to file patents to protect its innovations, and then to assert these intellectual property rights in this way, and at this time.

Regular readers will know that my interest in standards is not limited to those that help make information and communications technology work. Over the years I've written about standards created to address concerns more directly relevant to the human condition, such as human rights standards, social responsibility standards, and much more. The world being what it is, I think that it's time I did so on a regular basis, and that's what this blog entry is all about.

How often have you heard it said that "patents foster innovation?" That phrase rings true in pharmaceuticals, where investment requirements are enormous and failure common. But does it also apply in areas such as software? Does it really take the promise of a legal monopoly to motivate a typical founder or CTO to innovate?

Who's fault is the deadlock in SC 34, the ISO/IEC JTC1 committee responsible for processing the vote on OOXML? One way of looking at it says that ODF and OOXML supporters are equally to blame. The other says that it's the surge of OOXML immigrants that's causing the problem. Guess which one is right?

While many nations, agencies, cities, U.S. States and other governmental units have considered mandating the use of Open Document Format since Massachusetts announced its intention to do so in August of 2005, comparatively few have actually done so. Now, one of the early and consistent supporters of ODF has taken the plunge, and done so. That nation is the Republic of South Africa.

As you may recall, Microsoft's OOXML did not get enough votes to be approved the first time around in ISO/IEC - notwithstanding the fact that many countries joined the Document Format and Languages committee in the months before voting closed, almost all of whom voted to approve OOXML. Unfortunately, many of these countries also traded up to "P" level membership at the last minute to get more influence. And that's turning out to be a real problem.

As you may, "open format" bills were introduced in multiple legislatures in the US earlier this year in states such as California, Connecticut, Oregon, New York and Texas. All of those efforts failed to accomplish their original objectives, with every piece of legislation being defeated, except for the ones introduced in Minnesota and New York, where greatly weakened bills passed that called for the "study" of open formats.

As you may recall, Corel announced last November that the next release of its flagship WordPerfect Office productivity suite would come out in "mid 2007," and would support both the ODF as well as the OOXML document formats. It's now out a bit late and in beta, not commercial form - but it's also available as a free download for evaluation purposes.

On any given day you can find thousands of words of reporting, advocacy and debate over the role of patents in technology. One side promotes the availability of patent protection as the source of much innovation, while the other contends that they have exactly the opposite effect, and many other vices besides. There is, however, one inequity that patents help to perpetuate that gets little attention.

Military tacticians often bewail the havoc that the "fog of war" (i.e., the inability to communicate effectively amid the chaos of the battlefield) wreaks on their carefully laid plans. About 10 days ago I tried to do a bit of fog cutting when I posed a few questions at Microsoft's Jason Matusow's blog .