Slashdot Mirror
New York Jumps Into Open Formats Fray
cyrusmack writes "Hot on the heels of the bad news regarding the defeat of all open formats bills, New York has become the latest in an area that has seen a flurry of activity already this year. In the article on InfoWorld, it's pretty clear that this bill is significantly watered down from what other states have attempted to do this year. You can bet Microsoft will be there in force, just as it has been elsewhere."
they can't compete based on the quality of their products, that's for sure
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The thing is that Free software is not a business. It doesn't matter if Free software is ignored. It doesn't cost more if it is not used. The people who develop it also don't care whether it is used or not.
However, in the long run, Free software will win out since eventually more people will understand that software itself has no intrinsic value. The value lies in service and support and Free software tends to have lower support costs, since it is usually designed better.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
so you have a situation where Microsoft being public relations geniuses are believed by the politicians who in all likeliness dont have much experience outside MS's products. the old it's good enough for us because we're familiar with it still applies as disturbing as that is
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Microsoft probably realizes, which is why they fight so hard, that open formats have to win only one battle to win the war. Once open formats get a foot in the door it will only be a matter of time for open formats spread. Having a populous state like New York, California, or Texas will only make the switch happen more quickly in federal and neighboring state governments.
The advantage of using Microsoft is in economies of scale, and network effects. The same advantage will make open formats spread very quickly once established in one state to other states.
Microsoft is very afraid. They should be. Office is one of their few products that has the distinction of actually turning a profit. A move to open formats would force them to compete on price, support, and features, something that they haven't had to do for a very long time.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Seems to be a popular political stance these days...
Step One... Propose discussion on these so called "open format documents".
Step Two... ??? Wait for Men-in-Black to show up with briefcases of money for you.
Step Three... Profit! Cancel discussion by declaring status-quo sufficient!
This is not a problem, this is a hope.
As software openness becomes a mainstream issue, the political types _will have_ to form an opinion about, and that is good, because at least some of them will start paying attention and hopefully reading online.
The discussions mean more interest and wider coverage of the topic, and more awareness -- in the politico circles as well as the general public.
What is hitting the general public now is the first level of awareness -- they start to realize that there is this issue of open formats, free software, "IP" abuse etc. In a few short years the awareness will progress, and some people may even figure out what this issue is about.
And, since the issue is mainstream, this will also lend more credibility to the openness proponents easier, as they won't be seen as tinfoil hat nerdy types anymore.
It is not unthinkable to expect getting the point where government will accept the necessity of open standards and open software for their services -- in another hundred years or so.
State: Hi I like open formats because they're an open standard, owned by the world community. They're less risky, more durable, and extensible. And open.
Lobbyist: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa... whoa... whoa there buddy. You don't know what you're talking about. Microsoft Office format documents are used by 90% of the corporate world. Plus, Microsoft is huge. And has lots of money.
State: Who are you?
Lobbyist: Hi I'm Microsoft.
State: Oh, hi. Can I have some money?
Lobbyist: Sure
State: I like Microsoft Office.
Using openSUSE instead of Windows since 9th of October, 2007 and liking it.
Doesn't matter.
What's really going on is that they've spotted that simply mentioning "open source" makes Steve Ballmer fly in from wherever he happens to be at the time and offer them a "more competitive pricing structure".
Office is 90% profit so there's quite a bit of wiggle room.
No sig today...
The differences between Microsoft's proposed open standard OpenXML and IBM/Sun's ODF standard in terms of functionality they're virtually interchangable.
No, the difference between Microsoft's OOXML and ODF is that ODF can be implemented fully and interoperably by third parties, while OOXML cannot. That's not a legal question or a licensing question, it's a question of bad specification of OOXML. That's why ODF is an open format, while OOXML is a closed, proprietary format.
In addition, Microsoft has applied for a patent on OOXML, while there is no patent pending on ODF. That means that there is good reason to believe that OOXML is, in fact, a restricted format.
It is interesting to see what Microsoft is really scared of. All those slashdot patent stories do not seem to have Microsoft astroturfers, but this one is thick with them. I do believe the patent stuff is probably just to confuse people and they don't really care where it goes, but the threat of having to make their software write a format that others can read is making them go at it big time.
.doc format. Those importers work exactly as well/poorly as the .doc importers do: simple documents and carefully-made large ones work fine, but typical office users will find their text mangled by the import, and thus to them there is no competing product.
.doc format and it is pretty clear that inability to accurately transcribe .doc format is the main reason there is no competition to Word.
Anyway, although the above astroturfers are not going to listen it is pretty simple.
All those OOXML importers you say "prove it is an open standard" are simply programmers applying their previous work in reverse-engineerning
Any claim that it is an "open standard" is blatently false. There are commands in it like "work like Word 95", yet the standard does not include the source code to Word 95. Well, you say, just ignore that command, it's a minor detail, right? But that is exactly why those office documents come out mangled. It is in fact exactly the same as
You can continue to spew your lies. You will probably win. But this is one of the sickest things I have seen coming out of Microsoft ever and you can bet that you are making enemies that you never had before. Slashdot is a big cesspool of crazy zealots, but when you see Microsoft doing such a blatent, desperate ploy to save their monopoly, and the absolute insane direct lying in their posts here, I start to agree with slashdot.