Brazil Appeals OOXML Too! Asks Approval Be Reconsidered

The chorus of boos is rising - as it should...

Yes but what will happen now. Will the unclear rules be interpreted in line with the way they were interpreted to get OOXML approved?

> Will the unclear rules be interpreted in line with the way they were interpreted to get OOXML approved?

Aye, there's the rub...

Either the Microsoft toadies in ISO will stomp their feet and pitch a temper tantrum (thereby justifying their credibility loss), or they'll get a clue and back down from their transparent bias.

And I won't lay odds for one or the other.

Given the continuing comments from Alex Brown, I'd go with the feet stomping temper tantrum. However, it will be interesting to see if the "real" MSOOXML, or a full fledged translator thereof, will make it out any door any time in the future.

GD

I do not think you have read statements carefully enough to have caught all the subtle nuances. That is, it is not they that are throwing tantrums it is the extremists demanding the following of unnecessary rules. They do not lose their temper, they have no need. Their word is Law, it's the crazies that shout and throw things, not they.

So cool off, go in your corner and pout, leave this to grown ups ... you know like War and things like that. Your role is to wave flags and follow. Get it?

"it's the crazies that shout and throw things, not they."

Isn't Steve Ballmer known to throw chairs around?........

Wow, T E M. That's "nuance" if ever I saw it.

#s

That's the point, when you have a monopoly of power you don't need to throw chairs. It's when you are losing it the furniture flies. Like the God Father cutting off the oxygen, that's when they are smug. It will happen to the ISO too, it will just take some time. Until then hope the EU's E.C. keeps the pressure on MS so around a year from now ODF becomes available on MS Office. [I will believe (if and only if) it happens.]

Gus, Thanks, I suspected some appreciate some irony in their verbal diet.

I did not start with the feet stomping, temper tantrum stuff. I was answering a previous post with a little sarcasm thrown in. Or is that too subtly nuanced for you to figure out? Despite your uncanny ability to make things up about people you do not know, I did not demand anything, I did not shout, and I leave throwing things to people like you who like to throw "stuff" at other people to see what sticks. So why don't you go back, read all the posts, and post replies with at least an attempt at reasoned argument as opposed to "imaginative mis-characterizations" (the spin, the spin!). Or is that too much to ask from a grown up like yourself ? And given the tone of you post I do use the term grown up loosely.

I don't wave anybodies flag and I don't appreciate it when somebody writes something as moronic (as opposed to ironic) as you did. Get it ?

P.S. Being a monopoly has certainly not kept Microsoft (or Ballmer) from throwing around chairs whether they needed to or not. That's the beauty of it. Until the EU started enforcing the "unnecessary laws" that the US wouldn't, they could do just about what ever they pleased. And many, many companies have caught one or more of those flying chairs right between the eyes.

GDStewart:

Get over yourself and chill out, dude!

That entire post was written from the POV of Mickey$oft's ISO lackeys. As such, it was total sarcasm.

Get it?

_gus3

Mickey$oft ? Wow, now I get it.

Is everything ok in here?

There seems to be a little too much venom in peoples words..

> There seems to be a little too much venom in peoples words..

Nah. GDStewart was merely having a humor impaired moment. He gets it now.

Just to make it absolutely clear, none of my first post was directed at GD, I just pretended to be setting him straight in a very (I thought obvious) sarcastic entry. Other words were serious, however, since those running the Show for the ISO were extremely condescending towards any and all that disagreed with their high handed decisions. Those dissenters were characterized as being extremists. Others simply lacked sufficient understanding of the excellent job those in charge were doing.

Implicitly, as I wrote the first post I was thinking of the ol' Bomber (others call him Ballmer), however, only in terms that I knew contradicted the thrust of my post. So you could say he was in my mind, but not central. My critique was directed at those that allowed this travesty to proceed and probably seem to succeed. Yes I consider them corrupted (via MS funds), but that is too deep a thought to express sufficient in a micro-post.

I am sorry if I offended anyone, even initially. However, rather than employing the slashdot like tags always assume my words are warped. Perhaps with this being the one exception.

Txt.

TxtEdMacs, I got it the first time :)

Quoting:(others call him Ballmer)

You mean good ol' chap Darth Ballmer?

Classic Bully Ballmer, prancing around yelling, but without throwing any chairs here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hadxBZWxNrs