Slashdot Mirror
ODF Alliance, Who, What, Where (and Why?)
Andy Updegrove writes "On Friday, the new ODF Alliance was launched with much fanfare to 'educate government' about the OpenDocument Format. A flurry of brief news articles appeared the same day, based on pre-launch interviews (as well as an Op/Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal by Sun's Scott McNealy), but they didn't include much information. So what's it all about, why was it formed, and will it be likely to succeed? Given that the 36 members include only one government unit (the ICT department for Vienna), the answer is clearly to establish a beachhead in the government market as a target of opportunity, and then to expand from there to meet the real goals of the members."
Frankly, I don't see much of a problem with Microsoft. When it comes to making file formats accessible and interchangeable, MS has behaved relatively well.
I expect much more resistance from those software companies that have a business that almost solely exists because of their ability to monopolize file or datastream formats: Adobe with its Acrobat software suite, Apple with Quicktime, and of course Real. Especially the latter two would probably be kicked out of the market swiftly if consumers had an alternative.
Sorry but what a load of crap.
.... seriously ?
As I see it governments will have a choice of choosing between two formats both of which are in XML, both of which have a license attached to them, one format regulated by a bunch of bureaucrats with an anti-corporate agenda, the other a dedicated commercial operation (ie microsoft). Ultimately they have no control of either format, if they wanted something changed in the format they'd have to bargain with Oasis in the same way they'd have to bargain with Microsoft.
The commercial reality of it is simply this, Microsoft has poorly supported its formats on other operating systems because of the same reasons why every other vendor of software, drivers etc etc has poorly supported Linux and Mac.... numbers.... the numbers are in Windows, if you're making a product for the desktop that's always going to be your target market, where you stand to make or lose the most money. If you have finite resources and time (which is always the case) you'll sacrafice support for other operating systems in favour of Windows every time. There's no conspiracy here, it's just reality.
If I was making a decision in a government body I'd choose the format with the broadest support, with the most amount features for the handicapped. Does anyone really believe that OpenDocument will ever beat MS Office on these two criteria
OK you're right anti-corporate... and anti-microsoft. All these companies backing OpenDocument all have compaitble business models that are diametrically opposed to microsoft's. i.e. They're all predominently hardware vendors, and see software as just a feature of the hardware. (ie Flat earth thinking) They are pro-open source and freeware because they see it as the savior of their flawed business models.
The format of data is arbitrary and totally inconsequential, it's about who can access this data. You tell someone who is blind how lame an argument it is to choose MS Office over OpenOffice on this basis alone.
My point was that there are vested interests on both sides. Both sides have total control over their formats and will use litigation if necessary to maintain their control. Both sides will implement new features when there is demand for those features and when it is compatible with the business models of the controlling parties.
I have yet to see any argument that makes sense on moving from MS Office to OpenDocument other than from some childish good vs evil anti-microsoft crap, which I would be embaressed as a professional to use as the basis of a multi-million dollar business decision.