Slashdot Mirror


OpenDocument Gains New Fans

An anonymous reader writes "The OpenDocument format is gathering steam, as several influential companies seek an alternative to Microsoft Office." From the article: "The ODF Summit brought together representatives from a handful of industry groups and from at least 13 technology companies, including Oracle, Google and Novell. That stepped-up commitment from major companies comes amid signs that states are considering getting behind OpenDocument. James Gallt, the associate director for the National Association of State Chief Information Officers, said Wednesday that there are a number of state agencies are exploring the use of the document format standard."

67 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. Unfortunately... by keraneuology · · Score: 5, Funny

    Unfortunately, under the terms of MS licensing these companies are prohibited from using MS Office to draft documents or emails discussing using an open document format.

    --
    If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
    1. Re:Unfortunately... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Funny

      To hell with Microsoft then! They can use OpenOffice to draft any damn format they want! Cry Havoc, and let loose the dogs of war!

      * tongue planted firmly in cheek :-)

    2. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      According to our Microsoft sales rep, they won't support the open document format because if they do, they'll have to release Office under the GPL.

    3. Re:Unfortunately... by DrSkwid · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maybe cos them damn reps never saw the utility of doing this :

      cat office.doc | word2opendoc > opendoc.doc

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    4. Re:Unfortunately... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ain't that just the typical MS-FUD running rampant ?

      I think it's more of typcial sales-person FUD. Sales people can be extremely slimey critters, and will tell you anything to make sure you buy more stuff. This isn't unique to Microsoft, though it is amusing. (Especially after the whole Korn shell fiasco.)

      It wouldn't surprise me at all if the AC's sale rep simply took two unrelated facts (the fact that OpenOffice contains GPL code, and the fact that OpenOffice implements the OpenDocument standard) and intentionally confused them. If he says it enough times, he might even believe it.

    5. Re:Unfortunately... by indifferent+children · · Score: 2, Informative

      'let slip the dogs of war'

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    6. Re:Unfortunately... by merlyn · · Score: 2, Insightful
      cat office.doc | word2opendoc > opendoc.doc
      Of course, that would be a Useless Use of Cat.

      Remember. "cat" means "concatenate". If you're not concatenating, don't use cat.

    7. Re:Unfortunately... by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 3, Insightful
      According to our Microsoft sales rep, they won't support the open document format because if they do, they'll have to release Office under the GPL.

      This is such an obvious lie, that I wonder if someone could sue them for malicious misrepresentation, and unfair business practices.

      Besides forcing them to stop spouting that garbage, I think it would also generate some interesting (and very useful) press.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    8. Re:Unfortunately... by someone1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This isn't even funny. Sadly, even guys like Sen. Pachecho believe (at least spout) this BS.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    9. Re:Unfortunately... by tjw · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This seems like a silly argument:

      Do NOT use the 'cat' binary from GNU coreutils to print out the content of a file because afterall the name 'cat' originated from the English word "concatenate".

      Besides, the command '< /proc/mdstat' will not work in all shells.

      The linked page says the reason is that it's wasteful, and I guess that is technically correct since if you use your shell built-in may not spawn a new PID. So I guess it's as wasteful as using the 'date' command instead of getting your shell to print the date.

      --

      XJS*C4JDBQADN1.NSBN3*2IDNEN*GTUBE-STANDARD-ANTI-UB E-TEST-EMAIL*C.34X
  2. I suggest by karvind · · Score: 5, Funny

    Goo' ol' ASCII for text and figures.

    1. Re:I suggest by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's right. Viva la ASCII! ;-)

  3. No wonder by scenestar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    as government customers show more interest in open-source alternatives to Microsoft's desktop software.

    That's because those alternatives do not charge you for a new visual theme.

    --
    perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
    1. Re:No wonder by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, actually, Microsoft does.

      Office 2003 was a flop. Really, all it offered for the end-user was an ugly-ass blue theme to go with Luna. Vista? All its APIs are being backported to XP, making it a--you guessed it--visual redress.

      I know it's cool and hip and makes you feel enlightened to go against the grain by pointing out "M$ bashing" on Slashdot. It even gets you modded up.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
  4. Prediction by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Three years from now OpenDocument will be pervasive (the momentum is getting too great for it to fail now, especially when organizations face just as big of a transition to OfficeXML if they decided to go that route), and the #1 implementation, by far, will be Microsoft Office. All of the state governments will be running Office 12+OpenDocument SP1, and interacting just like they did previously. Of course a document opened in OpenOffice, or others, will be slightly different, and users will attribute it to quirks of OpenOffice, further marginalizing it.

    Sidenote: That bloody PIX SPORTS ad does more to encourage ad blocking software than any counter-commercial advocate.

    1. Re:Prediction by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are the mods huffing kittens or something? Parent is not a troll. Overly pessimistic, yes. Troll? No.

      When there's a -1: Pessimistic option, then he should be modded down. In the meantime, reread the moderator rules.

      As to the parent, I can't say I agree that this will happen. I agree that Microsoft will try (RTF, anyone?), but long term I think that Microsoft just has too many anti-trust watchers breathing down their necks at the moment. Everytime Microsoft attempts to rely on their old tactics (no matter how sneaky they are about it) someone is going to cry foul. It may seem silly, "Them: Microsoft has a tiny incompatibility in their support of the format! Microsoft: It's just a bug! No bigge!" but such attacks can really screw with Microsoft's time to market and keep them tied up in the courts for a very long time.

    2. Re:Prediction by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are the mods huffing kittens or something?

      Several posts were bizarrely moderated. I think a very angry person got mod points today. :-)

      I agree that Microsoft will try (RTF, anyone?), but long term I think that Microsoft just has too many anti-trust watchers breathing down their necks at the moment

      While I could imagine some division heads or rogue employees putting intentional "quirks" in, I think just as a nature of the beast OpenDocument isn't an absolutely literally interpreted format (e.g. it isn't an output layout format like PDF), so like HTML there will be some variations in the way it is interpreted. If Office becomes the dominant platform, it will also be considered the "right" platform, regardless of how correct or not that is. If you layout a document in a certain manner in Office, and it displays differently in a different client, then clearly the other client must be "wrong".

      Honestly I don't think I was being pessimistic - in the Office wars I do think Microsoft has a vastly superior offering, and if it's just a matter of supporting this format to make some states happy, then after a brief resistance I think they will. Everything will go on just like it was, albeit with a new document format.

    3. Re:Prediction by IANAAC · · Score: 5, Funny
      Several posts were bizarrely moderated. I think a very angry person got mod points today. :-)

      That's because it's... Thursday. The last time something like that happened was on a Wednesday.

    4. Re:Prediction by swanriversean · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe by not supporting ODF natively and suggesting that 3rd parties will provide the support, Microsoft is actually saving us from an embrace and extend attack on the format, at least for long enough for it to put down some roots.

      3rd parties will have no interest other that making the best possible conversion / support software. Given that anyone getting this 3rd party software will be highly interested in it working, any quirks will be attributed to the add-on software or Office itself.

      Of course I wouldn't want to go into that business only to have Mr. Gates decide that he missed another train, catch up by bundling it with Office and push me off to the sidelines with Netscape and RealPlayer. Although ...:

      1. create ODF add-on for Office
      2. sell the product to some people and make back my costs
      3. wait for Microsoft to add support directly to Office and undercut me with anti-competitive practices
      4. ???
      5. Profit!

      ... Anyway, I think things will turn out for everyone. Microsoft may try to embrace and extend, but the world is a much different place than it was back in the mid 90s during the browser wars, I think they'll be watched very closely as soon as they actually itegrate ODF.

      --
      Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr. Seus
  5. Apple by pubjames · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know this has been speculated on many times before, but I'm convinced that Apple is going to pull something out of the hat with regards to this, may be as soon as next year.

    Perhaps an Apple version of openOffice 2.0?

    They have to really -- their reliance on Microsoft to produce a Mac version of office has had them in a vice for years, but their agreements are coming to an end and Microsoft's grip is slipping.

    1. Re:Apple by lpangelrob · · Score: 2, Interesting
      They can do a few things, but releasing a free version of Office apps sounds more like shooting themselves in the foot. Repeatedly. Apple would literally have to not care about profits in order for that to work.

      More likely, they'll release their version of Excel alongside the existing iWork apps Keynote and Pages. If they manage an Exchange Server alternative, iWork would become substantially more important to them.

      Or, they could just buy out the Macintosh Office division of MS.

    2. Re:Apple by ModernGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The open office people have never been too apple-friendly. I doubt they won't be changing their outlook with version 2. The only way to run it will be through the X11 server, and in that case, it isn't very clean or elegant looking. Firefox has done a good job at maintaining a windows/mac/linux version that doesn't look like a sore thumb when placed in other environments. The best bet would be for apple to design their own office suite if they don't want to rely on Microsoft Office's. A native, clean, elegant version of OpenOffice will never be available for the Mac.

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    3. Re:Apple by idlake · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The open office people have never been too apple-friendly. I doubt they won't be changing their outlook with version 2.

      It's not a question of "outlook" or being Apple-friendly, it's a question of resources.

      Apple, on the other hand, has been downright hostile towards the OOo folks, telling them in no uncertain terms that Apple does not wish to make it easier to run X11 on OS X and does not wish other people to make it easier. Apple wants everybody to port to their proprietary GUI and they are going to do whatever it takes to "motivate" people to do that.

      The only way to run it will be through the X11 server, and in that case, it isn't very clean or elegant looking.

      As CodeTek has shown, one can do a much better job integrating X11 into the OS X desktop. The fact that X11 is hard to use and inelegant on OS X is Apple's responsibility. Maybe they'll figure out sooner or later that they are hurting themselves with this attitude, but so far, there is no indication of that. So far, Apple still seems to seriously believe that a pure Cocoa desktop is the future.

    4. Re:Apple by idlake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, maybe that is because X11 is ugly, slow, complex, and obsolete?

      Well, I'll give you this much: the X11 that ships with OS X sure is a lousy implementation.

      Beyond that, since you wouldn't believe anything I say anyway, I suggest you do some benchmarks yourself and share them. You'll find that a good X11 implementation runs rings around Quartz.

  6. Who is James Gallt? by faqmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who is James Gallt? Him? Why he's the associate director for the National Association of State Chief Information Officers.

    Oh, JOHN Galt. John Galt. It's, "Who is John Galt?"

    --
    Are you...Are you some kind of genius?
    No, ma'am, I'm just a regular Slashdot reader.
  7. Shootout at the MA Corral by alucinor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Red Hat would be Doc Holiday.

    --
    random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
  8. Re:Unfortunately... it reminds me of Fight Club by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Funny
    (Now watch as this gets modded +5 for no reason!)

    First rule of getting moderated: Don't talk about getting moderated!
    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  9. Re:How much will it change anything? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Millions of dollars saved from purchasing copies of Microsoft Office. Instead of concentrating money in the hands of a few (*cough Microsoft cough*), poor or even mid-class people can spend that money in more important things.

  10. OpenDocument Vs. "Microsoft Is Always Teh Winner" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is amazing to see the reactions a certain group of people have to the surge in OpenDocument adoption.

    This is one of those no brainer moves that would be unremarkable in any other industry. Technology makes the inevitable move to commodity status over time so companies can focus on competing in areas that actually give value to consumers.

    But with Microsoft there is a strange group of people who can only be described as "Microsoft Is Always Teh Winner" believers. The computing world standardizing on OpenDocument in no way negatively effects them and the continued use of the proprietary Microsoft formats in no way benefits them, but they have become so emotionally attached to Microsoft they see it as a personal affront that anyone would ever dare to not use the obvious choice of whatever the Microsoft solution is.

  11. The ball is rolling... by Beatbyte · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you really would like to see Linux of any flavor, Apple, or any alternative to Microsoft's strangehold flourish, do what you can to open the eyes of management folks to open source software. Make a spreadsheet of the number of office employees in your office, multiple the number by the cost of the OS (XP Pro is ~$150) and the cost of MS Office (basic is ~$300), add it up, and show them what could be saved while retaining the functionality (and gaining in some places such as not giving certain employees copies of office on their computer to cut cost when they really need it).

    Install Open Office on your workstation and show your boss how visually its similar to Microsoft Office so retraining for basic tasks (spreadsheets, letter documents, etc.) will be minimal. When the question comes up (yes it will) asking about opening attachments on e-mails from people still using Microsoft Office, show them it works and that you can even save in Microsoft's format to send to others.

    Review the upgrade frequency of the software used in your office. If you upgrade operating systems every 3 years, explain the benefits of switching to another operating system such as SuSE or Ubuntu as far as your finances go.

    I'm sure there are other ways to open eyes of management. If you can think of some, please reply to this and add it.

    On a side note, not only will this open people up to alternatives to Microsoft, but the fact that they have stepped back and made a change will only make it easier to change if there is another alternative out there that would better fit the bill. It'll get them thinking.

  12. Re:How much will it change anything? by Bob_Robertson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, that money will still be taken by government from the poor and mid-class people who would otherwise use it to improve their and other peoples lives.

    Software upgrades are already figured into the budgets, and a government agency will spend their money on anything, not matter how silly, before they will let their budgets be cut by even a penny.

    Near the end of every fiscal period, any money left over in the budget is very quickly spent, because if there is anything left over at the end the auditors assume that the department obviously didn't need the money and the next years budget will be reduced by that amount. This punishes efficient management and rewards sloth, abuse and waste. But this is government, and thereby I merely repeat myself.

    Bob-

    --
    The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
  13. Re:How much will it change anything? by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Fair competition is always good for the consumer. A document created by a poor child for school under a freely available word processor on an older used computer will be accepted by the teacher. The idiot teacher will not be able to force the child's parents to trade a coat for a wordprocessor. Think I'm kidding, my niece had a science project fail because the document produced in Open Office didn't produce on his MS Word a lower margin of 1 inch, it created a lower margin of 1.25 inches, yes the idiot used a ruler. When he was told that the document was produced in Open Office, his response was "What's that? I said to use Microsoft Word!" and my sister who was an Airman Basic making $800 a month paid $399 for it!

  14. I don't get it. by Risen888 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is there a reason that all OpenDoc stories must be filed under Linux?

    --
    Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    1. Re:I don't get it. by Dan+Ost · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, support for OpenDoc is primarily important to
      those who can't use MSOffice or who want to be able
      to seemlessly integrate a non-windows desktop into
      a windows office environment.

      What catagory would you prefer?

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
  15. Museum Archives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Museum studies programmes are currently heavily focuesed on digital preservation.

    And unfortunately storing a document is very complicated. It involves knowledge of software version, compatibility issues, bugs, etc ...

    Many of these programmes are leanning heavily towards open document standards. Simply because the people involved are not, and have no desire to learn every issue regard software excuatbles and how to make sure they will run in 20 or 30 years.

  16. Fortune 500 companies the key by southpolesammy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While it's nice that state governments are interested in OpenDocument, IMHO, this initiative will not seriously gain steam until the big companies around the world begin to adopt them. If GE, Walmart, Citigroup, GM, etc, etc, etc, made an effort towards OpenDoc, it will take off very quickly.

    However, most of these big companies are locked into multi-billion, multi-year contracts with Microsoft, so I would be surprised to see anything happen soon.

    --
    Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    1. Re:Fortune 500 companies the key by richg74 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      While I largely agree that getting things going with the big companies is vital, I think that some effects might show up sooner than you think. It would not take a wholesale switch away from MS Office to have a sizable impact on both the market and Microsoft, because a lot of MS's current position is based on the notion that "everyone uses Office". (Microsoft's stock price also reflects its market position and, apparently, above-average expected earnings growth. I think it is safe to say that Bill Gates is conscious of that.)

      MS is in kind of an interesting situation here. There's a risk that making more noise about how bad OpenDocument is will attract the attention of corporate types who otherwise wouldn't have noticed it at all.

    2. Re:Fortune 500 companies the key by Zathrus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      this initiative will not seriously gain steam until the big companies around the world begin to adopt them

      Very true. However, realize that virtually all of the Fortune 500 have government contracts. As states adopt the requirement to use OpenDocument, those companies will have to as well, at least to some extent.

      Additionally, some of the companies listed as participating in the summit are Fortune 500 themselves -- IBM (#10), Sun Microsystems (#194), Intel (#50), Oracle (#220). Nokia is a foreign company, while Google and CA should be on next years list (a maybe for CA).

      That doesn't mean that they'll switch off Office of course, but it does mean that they're likely to support OpenDocument in some degree, if only by purchasing a plugin for Office to export the formats.

  17. I sure hope so by scolby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I (foolishly) purchased a stripped down educator's copy of Office when I bought my iBook a few months ago, and Word has all ready corrupted five documents, screwing the formatting and replacing the quotation marks with funky looking i's. I used to run OpenOffice when I had a pc, and despite it's slow load times (which, really, who cares if you have to wait an extra second and a half), it was an excellent piece of software. Might be time to go through the trouble of installing X11...

    1. Re:I sure hope so by pubjames · · Score: 3, Informative

      Might be time to go through the trouble of installing X11...

      Try Neooffice/J - the native port. It works pretty well.

    2. Re:I sure hope so by Dolda2000 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Might be time to go through the trouble of installing X11...
      If you really bought your iBook only a few months ago, that shouldn't be trouble at all. As far as I know, Apple has shipped X11 installed in OSX by default since Panther.
  18. Re:Unfortunately... it reminds me of Fight Club by denis-The-menace · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does it matter when anything say gets you Auto-modded to +5

    No wonder I could get rid of my MOD points!

    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  19. Re:OpenDocument Vs. "Microsoft Is Always Teh Winne by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's a culture of corporate paranoia at Microsoft, and it's been written about before in books and essays. Everything is seen as a threat, everything requires a drastic response. For instance, Netscape and gave rise to tying Internet Explorer to the Windows shell and offering it for free. At Microsoft, you're always self-critical, and you're always paranoid about losing your market position.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  20. DRM in OpenDocument by robbarrett · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:
    The OASIS committees will seek to improve OpenDocument-based products for people with disabilities; add digital rights management features that would interoperate with Microsoft Office-based DRM systems; and standardize spreadsheet formula formats, Sutor [Bob Sutor, IBM's vice president of standards and open source] said.
    (emphasis added)

    Do we really want a standard that enables DRM? Is there such a thing as acceptable DRM? Why is this a good thing for OpenDocument?

    1. Re:DRM in OpenDocument by CrazedWalrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do we really want a standard that enables DRM?

      Yes, because if you want to see it adopted, it's going to need to do everything the competition does and more. Otherwise, you'll get the usual "Well, we would use this, but it doesn't allow you to [blank], so we'll need to go with a format that does."

      Is there such a thing as acceptable DRM?

      Of course there is. Just like there are acceptable uses for weapons, wars, Windows, and alliterations. Market forces will determine what the acceptable uses are. If an organization DRM's the hell out of everything they pass around, customers will complain or go elsewhere if it's really a bother. If it's not really a bother, why bother complaining?

      We're talking about word processors and spreadsheets here. If someone doesn't want a document passed around, copied, etc, then chances are it's "Privileged Information". Where's the problem, again?

      Why is this a good thing for OpenDocument?

      Like it or not, DRM is useful and is probably here to stay. Combining #1 and #2 above, I think you'll find your answer to this question.

    2. Re:DRM in OpenDocument by Eil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In prinicple, there's nothing particularly wrong with DRM. The bad name that DRM gets is primarily from all existing DRM implementations that are intentionally overly restrictive, trample on fair use, and are usually trivial to break in the hands of a competent hacker.

      Right now it's pure speculation whether or not "fair" DRM can even exist, so I suspect that OpenDocument's claimed support of DRM is primarily a token gesture to soothe companies who might have been steered away for lack of stated DRM support. On the bright side, any DRM included in the OpenDocument specification will, by definition, be open. Thus we'll actually have a chance to evaluate and properly its technical merits without the fear of being sued under the DMCA by litigatous bullies.

      Just as importantly, the mere fact that DRM is present in the OpenDocument specification does not imply that it will be built into any particular implementation. (OpenOffice, for instance.)

    3. Re:DRM in OpenDocument by flanman · · Score: 2, Funny

      DRM is absolutely a necessity if OpenDocument is to become a viable choice in secure applications.

      If I work on secret stuff and I want to control who gets access to something that I write, I can use DRM.

      This is especially useful when I write nasty things about my PHB and want to control who sees my picture of him with his admin assistant.

    4. Re:DRM in OpenDocument by Sketch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Do we really want a standard that enables DRM? Is there such a thing as acceptable DRM? Why is this a good thing for OpenDocument?

      It's certainly not a good thing for OpenOffice and other free/open source office packages since DRM is fundamentally incompatibile with open source. If you don't understand why, read this:

      http://www.boingboing.net/2005/08/24/drm_ssl.html

      Put simply, client side security only works (and that is debatble) in a completely closed system. Here's an example of this I ran across just last week. I have a PDF that I have many times copied and pasted text out of using xpdf. Recently, I bought a Mac Mini, and I happened to scp the very same pdf over to the mac, and open it in Preview. When I tried to copy text out of it, Preview popped up a dialog saying I was not allowed to copy text out of it without entering a password. That works as long as everyone plays by the rules in the standard. But as soon as there is an open source version someone can modify, it'd be quite simple to remove further restrictions once the software already has access to the unencrypted data.

      --
      -- OpenVerse Visual Chat: http://openverse.com
  21. You are so correct. by jocknerd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have worked in local governments for the last 8 years. This is exactly what they do and why open source has a hard time making inroads here. The thinking here is that we have to spend money or we lose it next year. So around here, we have the latest copies of Windows XP and Office 2003, but we don't seem to have any money to buy a decent office color laser jet that prints duplex. Where are there priorities? Obviously, not on production.

  22. Re:OpenDocument Vs. "Microsoft Is Always Teh Winne by Hosiah · · Score: 3, Interesting
    they have become so emotionally attached to Microsoft they see it as a personal affront

    That, as Hunter S. T. put it, is the nut of the matter. And what *is* this? Do people develop emotional dependence on Texeco gas and get all zealotous when somebody mentions Chevron? Does KMart have loyal customers who sneer at Target shoppers as "communist"? Do HBO viewers stick to their "chosen" channel and deride Cinemax? Yet bring up operating systems, web browsers, programming languages...anything at all related to computers, down to such trivial choices as text editors: instant Jihad! I think we'd better add "computers" to "politics and religion" in the list of topics not to bring up at a table.

    Man, I always figured if I'm going to put all that love into something, it's got to love me back. I just use what works for me, and don't really care what anybody else uses. Pity we can't all be shown the same courtesy.

  23. Re:OpenDocument Vs. "Microsoft Is Always Teh Winne by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ahh.. I see the problem. You might not be the MSFTW group, but you're still committing a logical fallacy. A perfectly understandable one that almost everyone makes. the "is-ought" fallacy. You are describing the way things are as if that is the way things should always be. The parent was describing the way things ought to be (according to him). The mistake is in assuming that just because those are the conditions that exist now, that they are the best possible conditions.

    Pragmatism is all right when you consider all the ramifications. There are certain possibilities which some might weight more heavily than others that lead to Open Document as soon as possible being the more practical and pragmatic solution.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  24. The wolfpack attacks the Alpha sometimes by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Normally, IBM, Oracle, et.al. wouldn't be so bold, but when they see the big alpha dog showing signs of weakness, the rest of the pack suddenly turns on it.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  25. Re:How much will it change anything? by Risen888 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let me explain it to you. You can go down to your local courthouse right now and look at deeds, birth certificates, etc., from 1905, or 1805. A hundred years from now, people will need to view documents from 2005. Open document formats facilitate that in a way that proprietary formats do not.

    --
    Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  26. False by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Office maintains is monopoly due to control over the format. If MS loses control of the format, then they will require a superior program at a much lower price to control the market. In addition, if they lose the Office monopoly, they will probably lose the Desktop Monopoly, but at the very least, will be forced to drop their prices all over (not just in targeted markets).

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  27. Wouldn't be surprised... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... if Oracle moves off Office and to OpenOffice.org/StarOffice. Sure, they don't have the features of Office, but who cares? Oracle sure as hell doesn't. Oracle doesn't run Exchange, they use their own backend mail server (based on Oracle) that is absurdly slow (I can download from the net at several thousand k/sec, but it takes me >30 secs to open an email w/ a 500k attachment), tends to lose mail, doesn't always let you know that there is new mail, has the worst webmail interface I've ever seen, and is just generally horrid (my previous two employers used Exchange, and it didn't have problems even vaguely approaching these). All because they don't want to send money to the enemy (MS).

    Most employees access the Oracle mail backend through Outlook 2003 and the Oracle Outlook Connection Service (OCS), but they also pseudo-support Thunderbird, and they're paying for development on Sunbird (calendaring front end to complement TB). I suspect that once TB/SB are mostly reliable a corporate mandate will go out ending the use of Outlook and OCS.

    Based on this, I'd expect that the next step after that would be to ditch MS Office all together. It doesn't matter that OO.org/SO won't read/write MS format docs perfectly, or that there are some features missing -- Oracle is the #2 software company, and sending revenues to the #1 software company doesn't make much sense. Particularly when you're in direct competition in several market spaces.

    -- An Oracle employee

  28. Just one question for the Slashdot editors. by MROD · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have one question for those people who decide which category stories go into:-

    Why is this article about OpenDocument format in the Linux category?

    The OpenDocument format can indeed be used by software which happens to run on Linux but it's a *FAR* bigger thing than that. The OpenDocument format is architecture neutral and as such if you could equally choose to classify the article under the BSD daemon or the MacOS or even Windows.

    So, surely, this should be under some other, architectural neutral label to do with digital freedom or open standards in general?

    --

    Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
  29. Massachusetts' choices by studotish · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The commonwealth of Massachusetts has two big choices out of which it can choose. One is to stick to the ITD decision and be seen as LEADERS at a moment in IT history, while the world was at a "fork in the road" as for as document standards. They will be written into IT History as such.

    The other option is to delay and dilly dally, wait for the rest of the world (cities, states, countries) to pick up the ball on Open Document format and eventually have it imposed on them either formally or by the market and go down in the IT History as "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" as for as document formats go, and be a Harvard Business School case study on leadership (on what not to do), inspite of all the excellent work done by their ITD.

    Choose carefully, MA!

  30. Re:Personal Detriment Foundation by Ricky+Cousins · · Score: 2, Informative

    At work I managed to tweak the msi for Acrobat 7 a bit to remove the useless plugins (eg: seach toolbar etc) and deployed that, used less ram and loads up a hell of a lot quicker. A quick google search should help you.

  31. A pretty easy sell by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 5, Funny

    to: ceo@oracle.com ; ceo@google.com ; ceo@novell.com
    subject: pissing in Microsoft's corn flakes

    Dear sirs.

    Would you like to lend your names to an initiative that will annoy Microsoft, and may eventually cut into their gigantic MS Office revenues? (Revenue they use to subsidize the parts of Microsoft that *your* company competes with.)

    This initiative involves a segment of the software industry that none of you compete directly in.

    Hope to hear from you soon.

    Sincerely - Open Document Guy.

  32. Re:html? by dastrike · · Score: 2, Insightful
    stupid question time... why don't they use html with inline css for a document format?

    HTML + CSS is not the most optimal solution to that as HTML lacks semantically quite a whole deal compared to what one would want to have in a word processing document. A word processing document is after all not quite the same thing as online hypertext documents, therefore it is more sane to have an own XML format with semantically descriptive tags for word processing.

    And HTML carries with it a great amount of legacy tags along with it. Not even XHTML is currently free from that legacy. It would just complicate things needlessly to try to make a sane document format by building it on top of HTML.

    --
    while true; do eject; eject -t; done
  33. Re:OpenDocument Vs. "Microsoft Is Always Teh Winne by jonadab · · Score: 2, Insightful

    > I've never had a problem with incompatibility
    > between version of MS Office

    Ah, I see you live in that portion of society where things are upgraded in a timely fashion, so that you have not experienced the pain of attempting to take a document someone sent you that was created with Office 2003 and help a colleague open it on a computer that still has Office 4.3. (If you suggest an upgrade, said colleague gives you a dirty look and commences ninety solid minutes of bemoaning the horrors the previous upgrade, with all the user-interface changes it entailed, and extolling the virtues of Lotus 123 for DOS. Eventually you tell the colleague to just save the stupid document on a floppy diskette, so you can take it and print it on a computer that's a bit more up to date.)

    With that said, there *are* some concrete benefits to the OpenDocument format, not least of all because it's *much* easier to generate with custom software. For instance, if you've got a database on your intranet containing names and addresses with a DBI/CGI frontend, it's easy to add a "generate mailing labels" feature that returns an OpenOffice document to the user; you can easily spend more time choosing the font so forth and setting up the formatting in your template than it takes to write the code that plugs in the data and returns the result. No, I don't expect the average home user to appreciate this sort of thing, but IT departments might think it's pretty cool.

    > The continued use of the proprietary Microsoft formats
    > benefit me because that's what just about everyone is
    > already set up for.

    That's either circular, or more likely you misunderstood what the other poster meant by "the continued use". Perhaps you thought he was talking about *your* continued use; he wasn't. He was talking about the continued *widespread* use, i.e., the continuance of the overall situation wherein just about everyone is already set up, more-or-less exclusively, for proprietary document formats. If this situation changes to the extent that just about everyone is set up for an open format, the only *potential* inconvenience that could cause you is that you would need to upgrade to stay compatible, but that would happen anyway with a future revision of Microsoft's proprietary formats, as has happened numerous times in the past; indeed, it is already poised to get underway again with Microsoft's XML-based formats, which are intended eventually to supercede the binary ones, assuming something else (like OpenDocument) doesn't supercede both first.

    The argument that the other poster was making, although perhaps he wasn't sufficiently clear, was to the effect that there is no benefit to you if the next format that "just about everyone" upgrades to (and you therefore need to upgrade to as well) is a future version of Microsoft's proprietary format, versus some other format. If you only use the existing MS format because that's what everyone else uses, then you are not part of the group he was arguing against. He was talking about people who specifically don't want any non-Microsoft format or technology to gain widespread adoption.

    --
    Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  34. Re:How much will it change anything? by jonadab · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > Think I'm kidding, my niece had a science project
    > fail because the document produced in Open Office
    > didn't produce on his MS Word a lower margin of 1
    > inch, it created a lower margin of 1.25 inches,
    > yes the idiot used a ruler. When he was told that
    > the document was produced in Open Office, his
    > response was "What's that? I said to use
    > Microsoft Word!"

    The office software being used is entirely a red herring here. Requiring specific margins is standard practice throughout academia at all grade levels, from the primary grades through to the post-graduate level, and one inch is by *far* the most common requirement. Students are *continually* trying to get away with slightly larger margins than are required (and slightly larger fonts than the teacher specifies, and slightly more than the amount of line spacing requested, and various other schenanighans) in order to "fill up" page requirements with fewer words; this, completely irrespective of software issues, is *always* grounds for downgrading.

    On the one hand the teacher shouldn't be requiring a specific software product, but on the other hand the teacher doesn't want to hear inane and irrelevant comments like "I used such-and-such software" as an excuse for using excessively large margins. His response *should* have been, "You need to use software that supports setting the margins to one inch." (Which OO does support, of course, but the student implied otherwise.) So his response was not worded well. But, if you assumed that the student's bizarre implication were correct, it would ammount, roughly, to a paraphrase. The teacher also should have known better than to assume the student's implication was correct, but if he does take a student's remark at face value, the student really has no valid grounds for complaint.

    Getting back to the software: I have wondered for a long time why the default margins in OpenOffice are so enormously large, but really it's neither here nor there. When you're doing a paper for school, you always need to check your margins anyway, to verify that they're correct. Not doing so is always grounds for downgrading, period. Trying to excuse it by explaining that OpenOffice was used is... well, let's just call it something the student needs to learn not to do and leave it at that.

    --
    Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  35. That's just a troll by Master+Of+Ninja · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of course it is a stable format. The specifications for it are written down. On the other hand changes will eventually be made, but these will be written down in a new specifcation e.g. OpenDocument 2.0. Every file format will have the same evolution where things are eventually added. The base file format will be the same. In fact the MS formats seem to be currently worse for this sort of format creep.

  36. ZDNet UK: MSOffice E29.5m, OpenOffice E200,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ZDNet has said that a French tax office (80,000 desktops) is planning to move to OOo. MSOffice upgrade cost 29.5m, OpenOffice 200,000. See here.

  37. More than one way to cat a skin... by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2, Informative
    Might as well give the proper example inline while you're at it (for the many newbies here)...
    word2opendoc < office.doc > opendoc.doc

    And I wouldn't call MS's claim that they'd have to open-source MS-Word to implement ODF FUD. It's an outright lie .

    Even more than that, OpenOffice is LGPL, which means that a company could compile in proprietary extensions to OpenOffice, (like SUN does to make StarOffice), and not have to open-source their extensions -- an opportunity that a small company would never have with Microsoft Office.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  38. Re:How much will it change anything? by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The real question is, did the teacher say that the margins should be 1" in the assignment? Or was there a general rule at this school that governed the standard formatting conventions for all the classes? If so, then the student is at fault for not adjusting the margins according to the assignment. Otherwise, the teacher is at fault for failing to provide unambiguous instructions regarding the formatting of the paper. The GP's post did not say whether 1" margins were a known requirement; perhaps the teacher simply expected that the students would use Word, which (presumably) uses that margin setting by default.

    --
    "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
  39. Re:OpenDocument Vs. "Microsoft Is Always Teh Winne by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't think that people do this over gasoline (well, somewhere, somebody probably does) but they sure do it over other products. There's the never-ending, epic battle between Ford and Chevy enthusiasts, for one. I've met photographers who were as zealous about Nikon camera equipment (and eager to convert everyone else) as any Mac or Windows user. (Not to mention Kodak film vs. Fuji...) Videographers go back and forth on whether Panasonic cameras are a better deal than Sony, or if the latter are worth the price. In most gun clubs or stores you can get a spirited argument going by suggesting that Smith and Wesson handguns are superior to Colt's. At a cooking school you could probably get your ear talked off as to whether German or French chefs knives are better, and within those which brands are best. I could go on and on.

    The quick answer to your question is 'yes.' Whenever you get people who spend a large percentage of their life in one industry, they develop preferences that seem obsessively odd to outsiders. It is our own fixation on computers that makes us think that people aren't just like this about other things; but being a "geek" isn't restricted to computers, we just don't use that term for people whose interest goes towards other things.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."