Slashdot Mirror
KOffice Developers Reply to Yates
danimo writes "In response to his letter to the Massachusetts administration, the KOffice team has written an open letter to Microsoft manager Alan Yates. It clarifies some false claims that Yates made, such as KOffice, StarOffice and OpenOffice.org being one codebase and that OpenDocument was thus never a real standard. Massachusetts has meanwhile adopted OpenDocument."
Microsoft spreads Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, what a shocker!
Bavarian Purity Law of Rice Krispie Squares: Rice Krispies, Marshmallows, Butter, Vanilla.
Why even bother with word processors these days when LaTeX is more than capable of the vast majority of document typesetting needs? It does take a bit longer to learn that Word, but everyone I know who has learned it has become far more efficient and can produce documents that are far more professional.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
I wish my organization would switch to some kind of inexpensive standard. We are starting to feel pressure from problems caused by running different versions of Word, or upgrading from OS9 to OSX and wishing they could take their license with them (without running in classic mode), or some people don't think it's worth the money to switch from AppleWorks (which sucks, by the way) to Word, and then we have to try to read documents in ClarisWorks (which also sucks) format in Word and vice-versa, and we are getting SICK OF IT! And I only work in an elementary school!
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
This is ridiculous. They are trying to establish a monopoly on the word processor market, even enforcing a standard upon people so they are restricted to their products. Heed my words, and use Microsoft Word instead.
Alan Yates.
Dear Mr Yates,
[...]
You can also write to the KOffice mailing list and ask your questions there.
I can't wait to see his flames on the mailing list!
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
In Massachusetts, is it considered criminal to mislead the government or the administration in such a fashion? Could legal action be taken against Microsoft based on these blatantly false claims (ie. that KOffice is directly derived from StarOffice) that were presented to the administration as fact?
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Why is it that despite the enormous popularity of MS Office, Microsoft squeals like a stuck pig when someone (usually a government organization) chooses a competitor or a competing file format? No one else does that - everyone else learns from it and goes back to make their product better so they can win in future. Only Microsoft whines when they lose. It's not that they CANNOT incorporate OASIS into MS Office. It also seems a bit hypocritical when they moan about OASIS only effectively being supported by one product, when their own formats can at the moment only legally be supported by Microsoft thanks to their patents.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
So he's not just "trying to save only [his] own face," but is actually pointing out that there are multiple implementations and that OpenDocument really is a standard.
Of course, it wouldn't even be a problem if they were the same codebase, because since they're Free Software they can all share the same code. Certainly, Microsoft could support OpenDocument easily just by copying the same code into Office, right?
...oh, wait.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Translated: Don't listen to Yates. We can assure you that KOffice is its own entity that is in no way shape or form a derivative of OOo.
It's not a bad thing, though. There are certainly people stupid enough to believe a letter sent by Microsoft would have no agenda. This, at least, sets the record straight for all the world to see.
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
They say it's "illegal" to standardize on OpenDocument and back that up with the (false) claim that the tools that support it are from a single codebase.
All so they can convince the Mass. gov't to use their own single codebase "standard."
... one of the first things that they teach you is that if somebody calls you an idiot, then duck the response. Don't stand up and loudly proclaim that you're not an idiot, you'll make a headline out of it.
KOffice, or anybody else for that matter would probably have better served their cause by not responding at all to this.
Wallin made statements like:
"KOffice is the most comprehensive of all office suites in existence, comprising no less than 11 different components in one well-integrated package."
Is it really, though? I mean, it's one thing to have 11 different components. But it's another to have all those components working well. While the very core KOffice applications like KWord are acceptable, some of the other components aren't exactly the most usable. To declare KOffice as being "the most comprehensive" office suite might be somewhat incorrect.
"Last, but not least: Within a year, KOffice will likely run on Windows as well."
This could be a very dangerous thing to claim. Let us say that in a year, KOffice is not running on Windows. This claim has now left the KOffice team in a very difficult position. They have no choice now but to include support for Windows within a year. Otherwise Microsoft and others could point to this letter as being a work of deception.
I commend Wallin for attempting to set the record straight regarding the claim that KOffice was derived from StarOffice, but perhaps some of the claims are going a bit too far.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
I'm still amazed that Microsoft is acting like this is a sudden event. The tide in Massachusetts has been turning this way for a long time. Didn't they wonder about Massachusetts being the only state that didn't cave in and settle in the MS monopoly case? Didn't they wonder about the ramifications of the Massachusetts "Open Source Software Trough" when it was first instituted some years ago? Didn't they see the writing on the wall in local Massachusetts community sites like Saugus.net that have been promoting free software and open standards since the '90s? Haven't they noticed that recent Massachusetts-based projects (like the local Teaching American History Grant participation have been embracing open standards?
Wake up Microsoft. This shouldn't be a surprise. What's more, other states have been following Massachusetts' example regarding the open source trough, so I expect that they may also take a good hard look at what's happening here now.
Does anybody know wether there are plans by Apple?
The Microsoft Office formats themselves aren't that great. I work at a investment company which relies heavily on Excel. Over the years they've been using a few spreadsheets that has been around since Office 2000 at least. When we upgraded again to Office 2003, we had a few sheets exhibiting really, really strange behavior such the sheets wouldn't update unless you do a cut and paste first. We ended up having to simply rebuild those sheets cell by cell in Excel 2003. Once that was done, everything was many times faster and no more strange behaviors. The resulting file was also many times smaller. If we had access to those formats, at least we could have looked at it and see what was going on.
Some of the traders have become so annoyed by the degree of control Microsoft has over what an user can do that they joke, "Microsoft is trying to protect me from myself again".
EvilCON - Made Famous by
This is the first I've seen of Yates' letter from Microsoft. He makes some points, and I'm curious to know how their own format compares.
How many different applications from different vendors already support the MS XML format? How does this number compare to the OpenDocument number?
OpenDocument will be usable on a number of CPU and OS platforms. How many CPU and OS platforms will be supported by MS's own XML format? (I use a Solaris workstation at work and do not myself have access to a Windows PC until I get home, at which point I'm not "working" anymore)
How long ago was MS's own XML standard finalized? And how widely is it in current use today? (I honestly don't know either since MS tools don't run onmy workstation at work, and I don't do this sort of thing at home to be worth buying their stuff myself) Has this been long and wide enough to "prove itself" in comparison to how long and wide OpenDocument's use has been to date?
If MS is losing business due to the choice of standard, why does MS not implement this open standard in their own product?
What are the costs involved with implementing MS's own XML format for 3rd party vendors in their tools such as OpenOffice, KOffice, etc?
MS seems to dictate what capabilities are required for "modern documents". Surely the committee that decided on OpenDocument knew what their own needs are and will be, and could determine if OpenDocument's capabilities were suitable?
The reason is simple. Typesetters/formatters are great for generating splendid output. But most people never produce a hardcopy (or any "final" output) for 90% of their documents. Instead, their documents are workplaces for organizing ideas, bascially pseudo-database records in a filing system stored in their "My Documents" folder.
In short, the vast majority of word processor use is for manipulating, organizing, and retrieving text-based data in a format rapidly parsable by human eyes as part of a workflow or thought process.
For such things, LaTeX, troff, or any other text formatter... sucks. In fact, it isn't even appropriate for the task.
But you're right, if you just want nicely structured, rendered output in hardcopy or PDF, you can't beat 'em.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
The idiot here is Yates; and, you are right: he will probably not respond to avoid making this more of an embarrassment than it already is.
But the KOffice team has to get the facts out. MA really does need to know that KOffice is an independent codebase. MA should also know that the argument made by Yates is based on faulty data and weigh his arguments accordingly.
Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH
SoftMaker Office for Windows|Linux|Android
Put up or shutup.
Yes, right now, there are only 5 applications that support OpenDocument.
Yes, right now, those applications do not have a lot of marketshare.
Pray tell: How many applications support MS Office Open XML?
How much marketshare do those applications have?
Oh, thats right, the answer it 0, and 0.
OpenDocument will always be better supported, and right now, OpenDocument has more marketshare.
Will this change with the release of Office 12? Maybe-- My guess is all your customers will continue to use DOC.
Will this change with the adoption of OpenDocument by the European Union, and various governmental organizations in the U.S.? Absolutely. You *do* realize that much of the economic activity in Europe requires working with the government.
Microsoft itself will be forced to submit documents to the EU in ISO-approved OpenDocument. Hilariously, Microsoft will have to use OpenOffice.org to do so.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
I bet that Microsoft already has most if not all of the code laying around to implement OpenDocument. They'll claim not to support it, of course, in an attempt to kill it so that they can use their Microsoft XML format to put open source office tools in check. (Indeed, Microsoft's vast Windows monopoly in the enterprise is increasingly reliant on their Office monopoly). Assuming Massachusetts isn't the last state to standardize on OpenDocument, though, Office will support it. And I'm sure they'll be ready to play the standard 3 E's - embrace, extend (meaning the open source tools will mysteriously crash / improperly render Office-produced OpenDocument files), and extinguish.
You could call the Massachusetts decision a victory, and I think it is certainly deserving. Just know that Microsoft isn't as dumb as many people seem to think -- you better bet they're prepared to launch their next volley.
"I understand your worries, but fortunately I am able to put your mind to rest: KOffice is in fact not related to StarOffice or OpenOffice. It is a completely separate product, and a very fine one at that."
Yates' objection was spurious from the beginning. Open Document is an open standard, so there's nothing to stop anyone -- Microsoft included -- from implementing a fully compatible Open Document import/export filter for their software. The only reason Microsoft is reluctant to do so is because it might loosen their monopoly grip on the office software market.
Peoples view On Microsoft 30 years on are a mixture of Marketing misinformation and Bills foundation (that has often seemed to favor those countries looking to switch from Microsoft products in the past).
People like Microsoft because they aren't fully aware of the competition or how Microsoft wiped the competition out through illegal practices or just buying them out. Managers like winners (even if they cheat) and there's know arguing that Microsoft is a winner.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I've found just a few bugs, for example German documents often spill into neighboring French documents, and the Italian and Spanish support needs a lot of cleaning up (especially the Spanish support: it really stinks). But I'm a believer. French software runs much faster!
Dear He-Who-Blathers-Inanely-On-And-On-Out-His-Ass-On-T opics-About-Which-He-Knows-Nothing,
... you know shit, but feel comfortable talking out your ass on something you know nothing of. Feel comfortable getting into an argument with KOffice developers about our project roadmap do you? Feel you know our codebase better than us?
You've already been told that the statement that KOffice will be ported to Windows within a year isn't a statement of courage. This is likely only a few man months worth of work. Inge knows this. I know this. Why? See... because we actually work on KOffice. You?
Typical... Slashdot... IDIOT.
The principal reasons LaTeX hasn't taken over the world are that it is almost unlearnable, and that the instant feedback of WYSIWYG is lost. I've been using LaTeX for almost 15 years, and still feel like there's a lot I don't know and can't do.
That said, the idea that one wouldn't write letters or a CV with it is just silly. My CV and resume are in LaTeX, and it is what I write letters with. It's way easier to get a document that doesn't look like a ransom note, and to get consistent formatting with different content, with LaTeX than with a WYSIWYG word processor. Trust me: when I evaluate the horribly-formatted .doc resumes I'm always receiving from potential employees, it's a strike against them. I'd encourage everyone to explore LaTeX as time permits them.
I have a splitting migraine. Had one all day long. I tried to explain to you nicely that Inge's statement wasn't overly bold. You didn't like that and have been arguing throughout the thread over something you don't know anything about.
KOffice already has one application that runs natively on Windows: Kexi. The other large applications... KWord, KSpread, KPresenter don't have hard dependencies on X11. They have a hard dependency on kdelibs, yes, but this has already been ported to Qt4 which is already working just fine on Windows. If you don't want to take my word for it, fine. If you don't want to take Inge's word for it, fine.
Regardless, he only said it was 'likely', not definite. You want to knock him for it preemptively when his forecast hasn't even yet proven incorrect? Inventing future dialog between the Open Source community and Microsoft? That's on you, pal. But, do you realize how silly it is making you look?
Latex is great for CV's, letters etc. Just use a template et voilla, nice output. However it is indeed NO replacement for word processors because of a few reasons:
- afaik it was designed as a typesetting program, i.e. to give a nice PRINTED result, especially for mathematical formulas. Roughly speaking, its target group is academics (and maybe professional typesetters).
- it is not very legible. Writing text is easy enough, but editing someone else's source is no fun (unless using an editor that recognises the directives etc). Alse cut-and-paste is not so trivial because style files can be incompatible.
- The output is great, but it can be a pain when (for some reason) you want to enforce your own layout.
Microsoft hates Freedom! Microsoft hates America! Microsoft supports Fascism!
And no, this isn't a troll, because it's supported by the facts of Microsoft's actions.
In other news, the Free Software community continues to ponder why the general public still views them as blithering moonbats.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
"First, there would be significant, and entirely unnecessary, costs incurred by all state agencies, departments, cities, counties, and school districts to procure new software applications that support the OpenDocument format for their individual users. Many state agencies already have licenses for Microsoft Office and other software products that do not support the OpenDocument format, and the expense already borne by these state agencies for Microsoft Office and such other products' licenses would be wasted by disallowing use of these products after Jan. 2007. As a result, costs to taxpayers would rise as executive agencies would be forced to toss out software they have already paid for, that they already know how to use, and that they can already use for archiving in open standard XML formats."
Aren't MS just confirming that they lock customers in to their products with this statement which is exactly what they're trying to get away from? Further, if the MS formats are "open standard XML formats" why on earth do we have to reverse engineer them to support them in competing products?
We all know MS work like drug dealers by giving away cheap deals to start and then raking in the profit when their customers need to spend so much capital to swap to something else. Is this just their way of sending around 'the heavies' when things aren't going their way??
Haydn
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. - Douglas Adams