Slashdot Mirror
GNOME Foundation Helping OOXML?
christian.einfeldt writes "According to long-time OpenDocument Fellowship member Russell Ossendryver, it appears that GNOME founder Miguel de Icaza's widely-publicized praise for OOXML as a 'superb standard' is being followed up with on-going support by the GNOME Foundation in 'resolving' the thousands of criticisms leveled against Microsoft's proposed standard. In an open letter in his blog, Ossendryver urges the GNOME Foundation to halt its apparent support for OOXML as a standard and to put its efforts behind enhancing adoption of the genuinely open standard, ODF, which was approved by the world standards bodies as ISO/IEC standard 26300 on 2 May 2006."
Miguel de fucking Icaza has been kissing Microsoft's ass for years now. Can we please get rid of him already?!
~Eien no Inori wo Sasagete~ Searching for my Hatsumi...
"Miguel de Icaza's widely-publicized praise for OOXML as a 'superb standard'"
There is really only a few possibilities:
1) The community is wrong and OOXML is really an open/good standard (heh)
2) One of the heads of GNOME is so inept as not to be able to see that OOXML is far from being an open standard
3) Icaza was bought off
Or is it something else:
4) ???
...dev tools that he feels he can deliver in his open mono implementations.
The MS haters feel dealing with MS is dealing with the devil.
Miguel has delivered useful open stuff.
The haters have delivered hot air.
Je ne parle pas francais.
Well, that's the beaty of Open Source. You don't like it? Don't support them, or fork the project or do whatever you want. They are in their freaking right of supporting whoever they want. And they have help a LOT the OS community. Mono is a great port of the net service and Silverlight is on its way to linuzz thanks to those guys. The DO something. What do YOU do?
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
This is slashdot. Everybody here knows that OOXML is just another msft attempt to control the standard. OOXML is not open, and everybody here knows it.
I happen to think that mono and evolution suck. I'll bet a lot of other people think so also.
Why doesn't Miguel just go work for msft? If Miguel is so happy sucking up to msft, and working with msft to ruin F/OSS; then I think that F/OSS community would be just as happy to see Miguel take his suckie dev tools elsewhere.
Does anybody even use mono?
Miguel De Icaza has already lost all his credibility since the mono days, where he pushed the transition of Linux developers to a Microsoft technology for no reason.
Now he works for Novell, a company with links and agreements with Microsoft, and instead of teaching his fellow developers how to write a damn working file chooser, he spends more time pushing for more Microsoft stuff.
He is a Microsoft developer now; What should people expect to get/hear from him other than more Microsoft bull?
I don't know about you, but my first reaction was..
what. the. fuck.
OOXML is a awful standard, filled with numerous little features that seem purposely designed to make it difficult for anybody but MS to implement. Icaza is NOT an idiot, so he must know that this response will be flamed to a crisp across the community - so why is he doing it?
What does he stand to gain from backing this? What have I missed?
The reason Novell et the GNOME foundation are so involved is for simple compatibility reasons. What better way to lure Windows users away than to provide support for the formats their existing documents are probably already in?
That sounds nice but it falls down when M$ sends in a clown car full of patent lawyers. That's one of the big reasons OOXML needs to be shot down by ISO. The others are a lack of completeness and 998 other technical problems. OOXML is not doing well in the marketplace and probably never will. If ever there was a case of wasted effort, OOXML is it. Resources are better spent making better ODF applications.
As for a better way to lure Windows users, have you seen Vista?
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
I've been developing in C# for sometime now. I've also done extensive development in Java, PHP, and Perl. I can tell you that the .Net framework and Visual Studio is by FAR the most productive environment for developing desktop applications, and (in some instances) web apps.
.Net framework, and the .Net development environment itself, to Linux?
And you're complaining that someone is working to bring all the applications developed on the
WTF is your problem? Are you really that stupid to think that interoperability with MS tools/frameworks is a BAD thing? How many people do you think would use Linux at ALL if Samba didn't allow communication to Windows boxes? Or what if there was no way to read/write an NTFS partition? Interoperability is key, and the task Miguel has undertaken is a good one. Quit complaining that someone's working to make Linux a more competitive OS.
" ... This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of Gnome is a disease ... Please, just tell people to use KDE." -- Linus Torvalds
There may be more problems, but the one I like the most is "because it cedes control over how people develop software (C# and the .NET API) for a free platform (Mono) to Microsoft". With such control in hand, Microsoft can make the development as awkward or costly as they want. And in the unlikely hypothesis developers succeed, Microsoft may call in all their patents and make half of Gnome illegal in the US.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
WTF are you talking about? What parts of KDE (the base libraries, the desktop environment or the applications) are "owned" by Trolltech? KDE uses Trolltech's Qt toolkit that is LICENSED UNDER THE GPL and (in version 4) ON ALL SUPPORTED PLATFORMS (unless you're interested in a proprietary license, you can buy one from them too) So learn the facts before you troll or shut the fuck up.
-
Miguel interviewed for a job at MS
-
However, they could finance him to subvert linux
-
This is all documented information
-
He's the kind of guy they like -- not a US citizen and willing to work cheap
The assertions are plausible, but without just one reference, one piece of evidence, it doesn't really advance the conversation any more than "LOL M$ suxors!!!111!"I've heard that, but without, oh I dunno... a reference, it isn't that informative.
Just one piece of evidence? Possibly an insightful statement... but conspiracy theories without evidence are little more than that.
WHERE???
That sounds like unfounded xenophobia to me. You have to have a reference for a statement like that. How much did he want? Was it less than an American doing his job would earn?
weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
In other words, Miguel is a Microsoft fanboy.
You don't have to clone Windows to produce a viable alternative platform... and in fact if you do end up cloning Windows you'll have eliminated everything that makes the result "alternative".
.NET and your formats and user interface and APIs are driven by compatibility with Windows? If I want to run an OS that's compatible with Windows, I've already got that option.
Why should I care about a Linux-based system where your applications are written in
What makes Linux an alternative is that it's an Open Systems environment that happens to be Open Source as well. That applications written for it aren't locked in to Linux, they'll run on any Open Systems platform. If the interfaces and protocols it uses are Microsoft's, then why should anyone care whether it's got a Linux or an NT kernel under the hood?
Trolltech engages in dual-licensing shenanigans and co-opts ownership of other peoples code to place in closed source devices in the same letter-not-the-law tradition as MySQL and ProjectMayo.
They can go to hell.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
There's a reason Ubuntu uses Gnome
I think the reason so many distros with Corporate backing default to Gnome is because they are employing the people who make the decisions within the Gnome project. KDE is much more user driven then Gnome in my opinion. With Gnome, Novell can have some real influence.And as for which desktop sucks ass, there's a reason why Gnome has only 3% more users then KDE in spite of most distros defaulting to Gnome for years now. (From http://linuxhelp.blogspot.com/2007/10/poll-indicates-gnome-most-popular.html )
Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
FFS, give it a rest guys: "Gutsy Gibbon is the code name for Ubuntu 7.10, the current Ubuntu release. It was released on 18 October 2007." What bearing a 10 day old distro release has on the role of NTFS write capability on the past decade's plus adoption of Linux is beyond me, but I'll leave you all to sort that out while I go shopping.
Morons. Should have kept the cure... why would you toss out the only good to come of it?
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Looking at some of de Icaza's recent posts on slashdot, I find them hard to reconcile with that innocent interpretation. His public statements about OOXML are wildly disingenuous; I can't see how anybody who understands the nature of the criticisms of OOXML could fail to see them as pure FUD.
IMO, it would indicate a problem with GNOME if GNOME couldn't tolerate dissent on this issue, but it would also indicate a problem with the community if the community couldn't see through de Icaza's reality distortion field, and understand that he's saying ridiculous things because he has commercial ties to MS.
In the OSS world, it's all about whuffie. De Icaza earned a lot of whuffie by founding GNOME and writing a lot of code. In my eyes, he's lost it all by failing to be forthright.
Find free books.
You're an imbecile. The software is dual-licensed. It's either GPL or proprietary, depends on what you want. If you want to keep your code secret, you can pay Trolltech for that privilege. Otherwise, you get it under the GPL, just like every other bit of Linux. Trolltech may do the heavy lifting with developing Qt, but as long as it's available via the GPL, that's no big deal. Because if they ever take it away, we still have the source and are perfectly able to keep going on with development. There is no way that Trolltech can do ANYTHING to KDE development. On the other hand, Mono is quite dependent on a closed MS standard, without any code to actually be based on, it's just an interface that can be changed at Microsoft's whim. That is the definition of proprietary.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
You are either a troll or a shill. Either way, you're very bad at it. Lemme lay some facts out:
1) GPL means that trolltech doesn't "control" any bit of Qt, as long as you use it under the GPL license.
2) Definition of proprietary: "Exclusively owned; private". None of which applies to Qt under the GPL. QED, you are a moron.
3) Mono is most definitely using a proprietary Microsoft interface. It's not code, but that makes it even MORE limiting than even access to proprietary code.
Go shill/troll/be a retard elsewhere
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Got hypocrisy much?
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Want to make a GPL-only fork of Qt? Go right ahead, Trolltech won't do a thing to stop you. In fact, up until the latest 4.3.2 release there was first a big project to port Qt3 to Windows, then a small one to add the compiler support to Qt4 that was missing compared to the commercial version and Trolltech never complained. But if you want Trolltech do to something for you, like adopt your source into their tree and maintain it, they're asking for something in return - that they can sell it for closed source software as well. I don't get your sense of entitlement, do you demand Linus accept your code as well? Or are they perfectly free to ask for something in return, or just to tell you to fuck off? Yes, they are.
Trolltech delivers a kick-ass platform for open-source development. They do it for free under the GPL, using their own paid developers to do it. How do they get paid? Well, they've found a way to make closed-source companies pay them for the use of their code. Who are you crying for? Those poor companies? That you can't ruin their business model by forcing them to take code they can't sell that way? That you have to run your own fork/patch set? Oh cry me a river... no, YOU go to hell. I bet Trolltech has done 1000x times as much for open source as you ever have.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
If you think C# is better than C/C++, for arguments sake, there's alwats Java. Don't forget that the differences between C# and Java are tiny. And of course, MS can still do to Mono what Sun did to MS-Java.
If Linux needs more specialised languages, there's hundreds of them already. There's no reason to get another, especially one that duplicate nearly all of Java's features. Python, Perl, Ruby, PHP even - these are all good at various aspects of coding different type of application, combined with shell scripts and the "unix way" of reusing commands through pipes, you'll find there's no need for Mono.
Wow, curiously you missed to comment on the important part (tip, the Allen-Vulcan-Ximian-Novell conexion)! :)
What's in a sig?
While working for Novell I was able to join both OASIS for ODF and ECMA for OOX. After leaving the OO.o development team at Novell to return to other work I lost both memberships and had to scramble to rejoin. Maintaing Gnumeric is a hobby, and my current employer is not involved in the standardization process. Paying out the membership costs of either OASIS or ECMA was not going to happen at the personal or corporate level. Thankfully there was a non-profit tier available, and the GNOME Foundation generously sponsored me to re-join ECMA and TC45 to continue to participate in the the specification process. After spending the last 8 years playing proctologist to every spreadsheet format around, and complaining loudly at the poor quality of documentation for XLS it seems ridiculous to pass up the opportunity to engage MS, and ensure that the spec of their new format was more detailed than previous efforts.
My personal opinion (not speaking for the GNOME foundation or past or present employers) is that both specs should be standards
http://www.gnome.org/~jody/files/2007-ON-Linux-Beyond-ISO-Dome.pdf
The FLOSS community is going to need to implement importers for both formats to help our users, and I'll be happiest when both OOX and ODF are significantly clearer. 5700 pages of OOX is too _short_, Likewise the 700 + 300 (Open formula) in ODF is far too short. Lets double the size of OOX (although with better formatting the number of pages would likely be unchanged), and lets quadruple the level of detail in ODF to get it into a useful state. I only wish that ODF had undergone a fraction of the review that OOX has seen.
This is not about GNOME endorsing OOX, it's about GNOME doing the work necessary for users. There should be reps from Sun's OO.o team on the ECMA TC, and MS reps in the ODF meetings. The goal of this process is to produce useful documentation, and it takes an implementor to know where the really important details are. It hardly seems in the best interest of the FLOSS community to leave the standardization efforts up to corporate interests at Microsoft, Sun, or IBM.
The article author is ... or deliberately trying to cause spite and malice
That is the generally-accepted definition of "troll".
Table-ized A.I.
Jody has an extremely balanced view of ODF and OOXML, which comes directly from his experience creating FLOSS office software and file formats. It's such a balanced view that it tends to take some folks by surprise... I am not at all shocked to see that you are offended by his stance, given the overwhelming strength of his credibility, and your utter lack of relevance or experience in the matter.
Neither he nor the GNOME Foundation are answerable to such dedicated, multi-forum, anti-GNOME trolls as yourself, segedunum. You keep whinging, we'll keep rocking!
Personally, I think that Less is More. We don't need more standards. We don't need more complex standards either. We don't need more pages. We need less.
The point of standards is that they should encourage the maximum number of implementations, and the best way to do it is by not being a burden on the implementation. If the implementation has to implement two different standards, it will be double the burden, and to what benefit?
I agree that the specification should be clear and in some cases that would mean adding more pages to it, but what you're saying seems to me you're encouraging adding complexity, you're advocating "adding more pages" when in fact you should advocate specifying some things better without compromising its simplicity and conciseness.
--
"Standards are so great that everyone should have its own."
I held the same view, until I read about his stance on OOXML. No one with even basic coding knowledge could honestly compare OOXML with ODF and say that OOXML is a better choice.
So, in nutshell, your complains are that ODF is just more "standartized it's own way" and nothing like old Excel cruft? :)
:)
I can understand your complain, but it's not "valid" if we are talking in larger scale. And I think it's too much trolling in your post, so it seems more like personal dislike of ODF or something that way.
But heck, at least this is one of most informative and helpful posts for this rather flaming article
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!