Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: opendwg.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to opendwg.org.

Stories · 3

  1. Autodesk Suing to Keep Format Closed

    Developers · Software · · posted by CmdrTaco · from the haven't-we-been-through-this-before dept. · 365 comments
    An anonymous reader writes "AutoCAD is by far the industry standard CAD tool for engineering drawings. When I was an engineering student it was on every computer in the college of engineering. Autodesk, the makers of the AutoCAD software, are attempting to quash an effort to reverse-engineer the proprietary binary format used by AutoCAD. Looking at the court order, their whole argument revolves around something called TrustedDWG that basically looks like a digital signature that verifies the file was created by an Autodesk product."

  2. Why Can't We Reverse Engineer .DOC?

    Ask · Microsoft · · posted by Cliff · from the would-it-be-so-difficult? dept. · 337 comments
    DanPeng asks: "It looks like Autodesk has been pulling the same kind of proprietary file-format monopoly tactics with AutoCAD that Microsoft has been pulling with Office. The difference between Office and AutoCAD, however, is that an organization, the OpenDWG Alliance has been formed by competing companies to reverse-engineer the AutoCAD DWG format. With the amount of funding that it gets, it is actually quite functional and successful, with millions of users. Even when Autodesk revised the format for AutoCAD 2000, the OpenDWG Alliance fully reverse-engineered it within eight weeks. Now, why can't Corel, Lotus, Sun, etc. band together and reverse-engineer Microsoft's file formats properly?"

    Good question.

    I wonder if it has something to do with the mentality of the players involved. I don't think Sun, Corel or Lotus ever thought that they might be able to get together so that they could compete on the Office market, I think they all looked to carve out pieces of the market with their own suites, making such collaboration impossible. Despite popular misperception, Applix does not convert DOC, it converts RTF (which may be close enough for some people). Star Office is striving toward this holy grail, but they aren't quite there yet. So maybe it's not too late for folks to pool resources and finally get the job done. In fact, with the eyes of the court on Microsoft, now might be the perfect time.

    On the other hand, we have DWG, which is a fairly rich format that deals with the description of 3D objects. Could decoding a file format that deals with text and its presentation really be that much more difficult to reverse engineer? I'd guess this depends more on the design behind said file format. If one of the main goals of the .DOC format is obfuscation, this could be difficult indeed, but I wouldn't say that it's impossible ... not for three big corporations, nor for thousands of loosely organized coders. It's one thing to have control of a file format, but it's another to be put into the position of having to change the format constantly in order to stay in the game. If Microsoft is placed in this situation, the onus would be on them to either concede the format until the next major release is made, or shorten the upgrade cycle on Office. How many businesses would stick with an office suite which forced users to upgrade every eight weeks just to remain compatible? If something like this were to happen, we might finally be able to put a dent in the everpresent Office monopoly.

    So why hasn't .DOC been reverse engineered? I would think that if this can happen to the DWG format then it can happen to any proprietary format. Have we tried, or has Microsoft's reputation, both professionally and legally, kept people from really thinking about it?

  3. Why Can't We Reverse Engineer .DOC?

    Ask · Microsoft · · posted by Cliff · from the would-it-be-so-difficult? dept. · 337 comments
    DanPeng asks: "It looks like Autodesk has been pulling the same kind of proprietary file-format monopoly tactics with AutoCAD that Microsoft has been pulling with Office. The difference between Office and AutoCAD, however, is that an organization, the OpenDWG Alliance has been formed by competing companies to reverse-engineer the AutoCAD DWG format. With the amount of funding that it gets, it is actually quite functional and successful, with millions of users. Even when Autodesk revised the format for AutoCAD 2000, the OpenDWG Alliance fully reverse-engineered it within eight weeks. Now, why can't Corel, Lotus, Sun, etc. band together and reverse-engineer Microsoft's file formats properly?"

    Good question.

    I wonder if it has something to do with the mentality of the players involved. I don't think Sun, Corel or Lotus ever thought that they might be able to get together so that they could compete on the Office market, I think they all looked to carve out pieces of the market with their own suites, making such collaboration impossible. Despite popular misperception, Applix does not convert DOC, it converts RTF (which may be close enough for some people). Star Office is striving toward this holy grail, but they aren't quite there yet. So maybe it's not too late for folks to pool resources and finally get the job done. In fact, with the eyes of the court on Microsoft, now might be the perfect time.

    On the other hand, we have DWG, which is a fairly rich format that deals with the description of 3D objects. Could decoding a file format that deals with text and its presentation really be that much more difficult to reverse engineer? I'd guess this depends more on the design behind said file format. If one of the main goals of the .DOC format is obfuscation, this could be difficult indeed, but I wouldn't say that it's impossible ... not for three big corporations, nor for thousands of loosely organized coders. It's one thing to have control of a file format, but it's another to be put into the position of having to change the format constantly in order to stay in the game. If Microsoft is placed in this situation, the onus would be on them to either concede the format until the next major release is made, or shorten the upgrade cycle on Office. How many businesses would stick with an office suite which forced users to upgrade every eight weeks just to remain compatible? If something like this were to happen, we might finally be able to put a dent in the everpresent Office monopoly.

    So why hasn't .DOC been reverse engineered? I would think that if this can happen to the DWG format then it can happen to any proprietary format. Have we tried, or has Microsoft's reputation, both professionally and legally, kept people from really thinking about it?