MA To Adopt Short-Term Plug-in Strategy for ODF
feminazi writes "Massachusetts is committed to saving documents in Open Document Format. Massachusetts is also committed to using applications that are accessible. Therefore, the Jan. 1, 2007, deadline for the executive branch to begin using applicationsv that default to ODF is being postponed until the applications can be proven to be accessible. 'Instead, the state will on a near-term basis adopt a plug-in strategy to fulfill its policy calling for executive-branch agencies to make use of ODF ... ITD will be following through with testing of the ODF plug-ins in preparation for a phased rollout, expected to begin later this year.'"
To the best of my knowledge, OO.o works well with all accessibility aids that work across all programs in the operating system. It is true that there are a few applications which only work with Microsoft Office (and, particularly, only work with Word), but it is my impression that those tools are in the minority. However, where are the holes? Why can't the disabled use some of these other applications (just as other workers are being asked to use StarOffice or OO.o instead of MS Office)?
This article begs other questions too:
Who will be making the decision (presumably the accessibility lab of ITD)? By what criteria will they make it? Is there a deadline for the decision? Can the ODF plugin for Office be configured to save ODF by default?
The article stated that the delay was based in part on the fact that the major open source solutions for odf like OpenOffice do not yet support magnifiers and screen readers needed by people with disabilities. I wonder how long it will take for those functions to become a part of the open source office suites out there? Just a question. I am really hoping Mass will roll out open source office software and prove that it is indeed as robust and useful as Microsoft office. Like that isn't the general attitude around here.
My humor is probably your flamebait
Well hopefully this will cause the OO.org people to add support for such devices very quickly. That would be a net gain for the suite and also show MA that community supported software can work and tailor to their needs.
On another note... this should read "Microsoft Office Granted Temporary Injunction in MA"
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
While the concept of accessibility is incredibly important, JAWS, the most used screen reader is totally tied to Microsoft products. Did Microsoft come back through the back door with accessibility to derail the Open Format initiative?
On the other hand, maybe this will give some impetus for Open Office to get into bed with the accessibility people.
True, but remember this is a phased rollout. The ODF plug-ins should be limited to people with disabilities. In the private sector I really would'nt care, however as a resident of MA, I think differently. You and I both know that VERY few people will switch to OO.org if MS Office is allowed to stay. I want Office removed from the default install of MA government machines. Maybe just give excel, etc to people who REALLY need it. That software is expensive, and the costs for ten or hundreds of thousands of site-licensed machines is enourmous. MA is a cash strapped right now. That money is better spent fixing their collapsing tunnel system.
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
It is clear pro-Microsoft move. I just don't buy accessibility argument for few reasons, mentioned bellow:
1) It is clear, that if MA would start to addopt OpenOffice/StarOffice, without doubt there would be plentful of small programming companies who would like to provide plugins/additional apps with OpenOffice.org support. Addoption is slow thingy in any case, so while pilot would be done, access apps would be already aviable. It is just matter of signal what MA sends to software companies;
2) And it is bullocks that Sun itself can't provide accessiblity features/addons to SunOffice. Sun has been big pioneer in this and I think it is clearly "if it doesn't work with Microsoft tools, it doesn't work at all" attitude we see here;
Of course, just my 2 cents
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Seconded by a non-US resident, who may know the general location of Massachusetts but doesn't have a clue about all those two-letter abbreviations.
Make a bigger switch and go all the way to Linux. XGL has a zoom-in function built in, so you don't need it in the program.
and the costs for ten or hundreds of thousands of site-licensed machines is enourmous
Aren't these sunk costs? Aren't these hundreds of thousands of machines already licensed?
Plus, as a MASS resident who has seen the state screw up almost everything it touches (see collapsing tunnel system link in the OP), I am not looking forward to MA doing a huge rollout of this new infrastucture. History tells me it will a) suck and b) cost me a lot of money. Now I'm not saying migrating to OSS/ODF is a bad idea; I just don't think state governments (and especially MY state government) should be the trailblazer. That thundering hoard you see is droves of people leaving MA (the only state in the union to suffer a decrease in population in the last two censuses) because of things like the Big Dig, and other callosally mismanaged debacles riddled with patronage, schedule slips, and massive budget overruns at the taxpayer's expense.
I also can't seem to shake the suspicion that this is mostly politically motivated. Recall that MA was the last state to withdraw from the MS monopoly penalty phase. That stubborness also ended up costing taxpayers millions, with nothing to show for it. Why do I think (as a lifelong MA resident) this is really more about revenge than it is about making things better?
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
It would seem like a logical thing to do would be to outfit a few departments with no disabled (I guess we're really talking about blind and partially-sighted) people with OOo, and hold back their licences for new people who do need MS Office.
c id=15948385 on another article today). The last people you want to be inflicting compatibility problems on are your disabled user base - they have enough problems without also being relegated to an applications platform subtly different to everyone else's.
You can't do that. Anymore than you can stick "a few departments with no disabled" in an inaccessible building.
It is also entirely likely that they want to maintain one platform (for deployment, maintenance, training and support reasons) rather than multiple (and the cost of multiple may well outweigh any MS licence savings).
Plus, using both MS and OO ODF implementations at the same time is likely to expose compatibility problems (see eg. this comment http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=194602&
I'm not sure to what extent it matters to you, but one other reason not to use "begs the question" instead of "raises the question" is that you'll come off as someone who tries to sound smarter than s/he really is, if the reader is familiar with the original meaning of the idiom. Pretentious of them? Perhaps. But I often find it hard myself to avoid instinctively thinking "idiot" at some subconscious level whenever I encounter similar errors. And then you'll have a much harder time trying to convince your opponents of your point.
Disclaimer: My own slashdot posts are probably riddled with similar errors, since english isn't my native language.