Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Pledges Conditional Support for ODF
Macthorpe writes "BetaNews is reporting that Microsoft has announced in a letter that they will support ODF as a format option, if it doesn't 'restrict choice among formats'. Citing their lack of opposition to the ratification of ODF as a standard, they go on to say: 'ODF's design may make it attractive to those users that are interested in a particular level of functionality in their productivity suite or developers who want to work that format. Open XML may be more attractive to those who want richer functionality [...] This is not to say that one is better than the other — just that they meet different needs in the marketplace.'"
I am not sure why neither one of these formats approaches the consistency of Publisher files or Pagemaker files when it comes to retaining formatting across platforms and versions. pub files and pagemaker files (I forget what they were called) were much more consistent across versions back in 2002 (Last time I was an editor for anything was 2003). Anybody know why? Granted that pub files were enormous, but in today's day and age, size matters lesser than it did before (My girlfriend tells me that every night)
Cheers!
Atheist: Buddhist in a Prius
Is it just me, or do other people feel like gagging every time someone at Microsoft says something is "rich," has "richness," "rich user experience," etc.
It's like eating a whole stick of butter with mayonnaise to dip it in. MS "richness" can't be good for you.
*hurls into the wastebasket*
If ODF support were perfect, I might consider buying an updated OS X version of Word when a native Intel version is available - I would want to try a 30 day demo first, however. I own licenses for older versions of Word/Office for Windows and OS X (I am an author and most of my publishers like manuscripts delivered in Word formats). I have written several books using OpenOffice.org, and at the last minute converted to Word.
That said, at least for my work on Mac OS X, the best writing tools are: TexShop with OmniGraffle for technical diagrams. Latex and OmniGraffle are a great combination!
Just as the automobile can co-exist with the airplane, ODF and Open XML can and should co-exist, the team writes. They go on to imply that standards agencies should not place themselves in a role similar to restricting transportation solely to the ground level.
Sorta like the Department of Homeland Security and the 'No Fly Lists' that they put out to limit people to ground level transportation? I'm sorry but if ODF becomes the standard everyone uses/wants then Microsoft can adapt or die like anyone else in the marketplace. We dont owe them any favors for half assed OSes with bugs all the way up and down the spectrum and trying to force DRM onto people and make themselves out to be the Piracy Police.
The fact they're putting so much time and effort into trying to kill ODF just goes to prove that the standard *IS* a much better designed one and that Microsoft cannot compete on a level playing field. Oh dont worry I fully expect that sooner or later they'll find a way to make it so you cant install open office or any alternative text editors onto their machines (what you thought that computer you bought was YOURS?)
09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
+2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
Personally, I think file formats will become irrelevant to the end user.
It's really dumb that (for instance) we produce documents in Word, convert them to PDF, email them to someone else, who will read them on a computer screen. We are stuck in last generation technology, and people growing up with the web today just won't do it. Although many of us find it hard to believe, on-line systems will eventually replace Microsoft Word, OpenOffice etc. completely.
When that happens, the file formats will be irrelevant to the end user, just as web page formats are pretty much irrelevant to current web users. This is bad news for Microsoft, since they have an incredible amount of lock-in at the moment due to their proprietary formats. However, they are not going to be able to transition that lock-in to the web.
Well, after reading TFA, I get the impression that Microsoft hasn't really gone for "active support" as such. What they have said is that they didn't object to ODF going through the standards bodies.
Of course, with ODF being a fairly well documented open standard, there wasn't really any convincing way that they *could* object.
What makes MS very, very scared is widespread ODF adoption. Once state governments started to mandate open standards in government documents, it looked pretty much like ODF would get adopted. Not because ODF was superior, but because they had bothered to go through ANSI/ISO etc.
Since then, there has been a two pronged solution for microsoft. One has been to get OOXML to become a "proper standard", and the other is to browbeat state governments into giving up their policies. The former ran into problems, when IBM and others pointed out to ECMA that the OOXML spec was anything but open.
Microsoft cried foul straight away. Their argument "We didn't object to ODF, why are you objecting to OOXML?". The answer from IBM et al. was -- the OOXML standard sucks, and can only be implemented by someone who has the source code for all versions of MS-Office. It's not open, and until it is, we are not supporting it.
This "announcement" by MS, is nothing more than a warmed over restatement of this position, and mentions some esoteric features of OOXML that are not in ODF.
I'm thinking they might use the Sun plugin under some special licensing deal that alows them to more closely refine the standards they are implementing.
Opensource scare MS in their own product because they lose the level of control they are used to having. If the community changes the development and the model behind it or even changes the license to something MS wouldn't agree with (the community or sun) MS would be left out of the picture or force into a situation they might not like.
I also suspect they would work for a better license then they got with Java where they can embrace and extend without complaints. This way they can blame stuff that isn't the same on others and their failures. They might like the shortcut in the effort but not the loss of control.
But, OOXML does have more features. Why, there is the "kern italics font as in Word 95" feature. And the "line spacing as displayed in Word 6" feature.
Really, please do read the OOXML standard. It reads like Microsoft putting into words every single quirk their products have ever had, and then knowing that no one else could possibly hope to implement it.
Bearded Dragon
Another bad news is that MS will somehow manage to "interpret" the ODF standard incorrectly and cripple its functionality making it look inferior in the eyes of the user. Maybe, it will magically mess up the formatting, printing, exporting to other types, who knows what else. What I do know is that this one sour experience will stir users away from using ODF and force them to stick with OXML. Watching MS do "business" has become like watching a Mexican soap opera, I already know the plot and ending even before it starts.
[alk]
Lets say I am a screen manufacturer. I currently create a screen of QVGA resolution (320×240). It is correctly sized for 96DPI having a diagonal of 4.16666667 inches. (If I calculated correctly). Now I decide to make a new screen of the same size, but using VGA resolution. (640X480). Now what do I tell the OS? If I claim 96 DPI (technically incorrect) the user has 4 times the usable screen space, although all objects are 1/4 the physical size. That may be what some users would prefer. Otherwise I can claim 192 DPI. Then everything on the screen would take the same amount of physical space, but would be sharper. Thus a 72 point tall font would appear exactly one inch tall on both displays, but would be much clearer on the VGA screen. So which choice do I make? Also complicating the decision is the fact that many programs are interested in sizes in terms of pixels. This does not mess well with measurement in therms of real-world units.
Only somewhat recently have the mainstream OS's gained decent support for multiple DPI's.
Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
If ODF becomes a standard and OOXML does not, Microsoft will do one of two things (or both).
1) Use their existing leverage in the market to push their own format anyway, possibly by providing a crappy bug-ridden conversion utility. This way, if people try to jump off the "sinking Microsoft format ship" then they will not be able to do so perfectly (i.e. loss of formatting/limbs/life)
2) Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (as one poster noted with Java). They will use the committees that they have already loaded with Microsoft business partners to pass many "updates" or revisions to the standard, probably to the point where it's less like ODF and more like OOXML. Maybe they'll even shove VML into ODF, because they can't be arsed to support SVG in Word.
And what is their incentive to do so when you will buy it anyway? Why would they port it when everyone will just buy their game made for Vista subsidized by Microsoft?
A title made only for Vista and DirectX 10 needs to FLOP or at least struggle and then port and be successful before it will be a good business move. Guess who can help that happen? YOU.
Guess how you ensure the status quo continues? Do exactly what you are doing.
Want to make minor change? Write the company and say you would buy a Linux or Mac copy of their game.