Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Eases Licensing On Office 2003 Formats

kfiller writes "Microsoft has negotiated a deal with the state of Massachusetts to lower licensing restrictions on the Excel and Word XML formats in Office 2003, in exchange for the state to reconsider their focus on adopting 'open standards' to adopting 'open formats'. Is this just another move to encroach on the open source community?"

10 of 208 comments (clear)

  1. Licensing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Will it be possible for openoffice to *read* (not write) these files under the new licensing restrictions. If not, then they are not open enough for exchangability. Write support I can understand MS wanting to keep proprietary. The old non-XML format is used as the lowest common denominator between nearly all word processors/spreadsheat applications. However, I would like to see this MS-XML fail due to OOo's XML, and eventually force MS to include support.

  2. Good or bad? by ctr2sprt · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If the result of this is MS fully opening the MS Office file formats, so that every other office suite out there can read and write them with 100% compatibility, then that's great! It's not as good for open source as mandating the use of e.g. OO.o would be, but it's still good, and more importantly it focuses more on freedom. (I don't see how being forced to use OO.o would be any better than being forced to use MS Office. I still don't have a choice either way.)

    I did RTFA and it's a little unclear as to whether this is what's actually happening or not, but I can certainly hope.

    1. Re:Good or bad? by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the result of this is MS fully opening the MS Office file formats, so that every other office suite out there can read and write them with 100% compatibility, then that's great! It's not as good for open source as mandating the use of e.g. OO.o would be, but it's still good, and more importantly it focuses more on freedom.

      Were this the case, then it'd actually be better for the OSS crowd than mandating the use of any specific application. Any app, anywhere, can read and write MS docs with complete confidence. Nothing to sneeze at.

      That said, it remains to be seen what this translates into. I'm betting they open up their schema a bit, but leave the actual data storage closed.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  3. not get excluded by ecalkin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Even the big guys have to compete sometimes. About 1988 or 1989, IBM was making the PS/2 line, which was 3.5 floppy only. You could get an external 5.25 floppy (low density), but it was expensive and a PITA.
    A lot of people wanted 5.25 internal at that time and IBM said 'NO'. Our way or the Highway.

    All of the sudden a large number of major corporations and *Government* agencies were buying computers with a specification that said 'Internal 5.25 HD FDD'. I was actually at a event where an IBM rep was trying to tell a major customer that they didn't really need this. One of the effects of this was to automatically remove IBM from the bid process.

    Sometime in 1989 or 1990, IBM introduced a 5.25 internal HD FDD for the model 80.

    The Moral of this Story?
    If enough people wave enough money that someone can't touch, it get's their attention. Even Microsoft.

    eric

  4. Microsoft *wants* to play nice, but... by Dink+Paisy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Microsoft really wants to be a good guy. The thing that remains to be seen is if they are any good at it. This is the latest move. Earlier moves include lots of customer communication initiatives, encouraging employee blogs, and settling open legal issues so that Microsoft is not seen as happy to be in court.

    Microsoft is losing customers, particularly European and American state governments, because they don't like Microsoft. Microsoft really does have the best office suite in a technical sense. OO.o is generally less intuitive, and has less features (particularly in spreadsheets, but even the word processor lacks much advanced functionality). Costs are hard to judge, but most studies suggest that using a free office suite instead of MS Office won't pay off over the time periods that corporations and governments make long range financial plans. Switching to OO.o is about politics, not technical or financial superiority.

    It's also difficult to switch right now, partially because of proprietary lock-in to the file format. That's one of the things that makes switching so expensive (although probably not the major one, with OO.o import filters being somewhat decent). Customers want to be free to switch. They also want to be free to generate documents from sources other than MS Office and import them natively, and they want to be able to process documents using their own custom tools. Open file formats help all of those things, and so customers are happy.

    Microsoft really wants to make customers happy. Opening file formats helps, so Microsoft is doing that. There are risks; if customers continue to hate Microsoft, and Microsoft makes it easier to switch away from them, the obvious result is losing customers. The upside is that they may make customers happy, convincing more to stay. Being a nice guy is directly connected to making customers happy.

    From an open-source community view, opening file formats is good. It makes interoperability easier. By itself, though, it's not enough to make customers happy, or to make Microsoft a friend to the OSS community. More moves are necessary, and what they are and when (if ever) the will come is still a big question.

    Just a question here, what would Microsoft have to do for you to consider them to be a friendly corporation, rather than an evil and menacing corporate giant? I kind of like them already, but I know I'm unusual in that regard.

    --

    Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult;
    whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse.
    --Proverbs 9:7
  5. Re:Sounds stupid all around. by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Interesting
    So is other content in the article. Check out this whopper of a lie:
    As with the introduction of Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative, gaining approval for the Office 2003 XML formats would certainly bring Microsoft closer to the open source community
    Someone who actually bought into the whole "Shared Source" bullshit. Shared Source, of course, is Microsoft Doublespeak and has nothing to do with the open source community, except possibly to taint open source developers who are stupid enough to look at it.

    Figures, though - the original article was written using Word (had to remove the stupid "smart quotes and other bizarre characters" stuff when cutt-and-pasting the quote).

  6. Microsoft is still a monopoly. by khasim · · Score: 3, Interesting
    They can't enforce their ideas, "either you do it our way or not at all" - now they must respect the customer, as the customers have a choice - now Microsoft can't hold its firm stand of a monopoly and must yield to demands...
    Great. Then I'm sure you'll have no trouble getting some non-Microsoft OS pre-installed on any Dell desktop/laptop they sell.

    Oh, you can't do that?

    Well, I'm sure you can at least get Firefox pre-installed.

    Oh, not that either?

    What this is is Microsoft attempting to prevent a State from breaking away from the Microsoft monopoly.

    The proprietary, binary extensions in MS's version of XML are patented. That gives MS a lot of power when agreeing to a deal like this.

    Just look at MS's work to "extend" SPF and how their license was determined not to be Free enough.

    The list of approved formats include .pdf's. OpenOffice.org can write .pdf's natively. MS Office cannot. If this passes without MS's formats being included, then it will be a real threat to MS's monopoly.

    If it passes with MS's formats allowed, then it won't.

  7. EU Commission's Open Standards definition by jeroendekkers · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is actually what the EU commission thinks is an open standard:

    The following are the minimal characteristics that a specification and its attendant documents must have in order to be considered an open standard:

    The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties (consensus or majority decision etc.). The standard has been published and the standard specification document is available either freely or at a nominal charge. It must be permissible to all to copy, distribute and use it for no fee or at a nominal fee. The intellectual property - i.e. patents possibly present - of (parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis. There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.

    It's a very strict definition. For example, PDF doesn't qualify as an Open Standards, because it's controlled by Adobe and doesn't have an open decision-making procedure

    I think Microsoft is pretty scared about this, because most EU member states are going to use this definition, together with previous or future decisions to move to Open Standards. That would mean that MS Office either has to support these Open Standards or it will just be replaced by software that does.

  8. Re:Microsoft by Elektroschock · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem for Microsoft is the domino effect.

    OpenOffice.org 2.0 will make it even more difficult for them. I currently use the development versions and I must tell you, they are a giant leap. The advantage of MS-Office melts away. Governments now know that they have to consider using OpenOffice to get discounts for MS-Office. But soon OpenOffice will be a superiour choice.

    MS responds here, it does not set the agenda, it does not embrace it reacts to a policy drift out of their control.

  9. The Ten Commandments of the Paying Customer by rlwhite · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am the paying customer who has made you rich.

    You shall have no other priorities before me.

    You shall not make for yourself a priority in the form of monopoly or world domination. You shall not seek them; for I, the paying customer, am a demanding customer, punishing the bottom line for the sin of management to the third and fourth product lines of those who are greedy, but showing love to a thousand product lines of those who love me and keep my commandments.

    You shall not lock-in the customer, for the customer will not hold anyone guiltless who locks him in.

    Remember the law by keeping it holy. Within the law you shall labor and do all your work, but outside the law you shall do no business. Outside the law you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your employee, nor your contractor, nor your family. For the customer is a citizen who has taken part in creating and maintaing the law, but he despises criminals. Therefore the customer blessed the law and made it holy.

    Honor the open standards, so that you may live long in the profits the customer is giving you.

    You shall not make buggy, insecure, or generally bad products.

    You shall not conspire with or attack other businesses.

    You shall not steal.

    You shall not deceive anyone.

    You shall not covet the paying customer's remaining cash. You shall not overcharge him, obsolete his product, break his systems, or covet anything that belongs to your paying customer.

    Do to others as you would have them do to you, for this sums up my commandments.