Slashdot Mirror
France Leading Charge Against OOXML
Bergkamp10 writes "As Microsoft's Office Open XML document format waits in ISO limbo, South Africa, Korea, and the Netherlands are now actively pursuing the alternative Open Document Format instead, said the ODF Alliance. The Alliance now claims 500 members, and by their count 13 nations have announced laws or rules that favor the use ODF over Microsoft's Office formats. Those nations include Russia, Malaysia, Japan, France, Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, and Norway. The French have been the most aggressive in their rejection of Microsoft's standard; nearly half a million French government employees are being switched to OpenOffice. There has been no similar move in the US, though in a speech at Google last week Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama called for data to be stored in 'universally accessible formats.'"
I am surprised Korea is on the list. I remember a story here on slashdot about how many websites there relied on active x code that was incompatible with Vista, so much so that very few in the country were expected to make the switch to Vista.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
The UK has had a policy of equal consideration for open source solutions for years now. Unfortunately there are still many cases of corruption -- Microsoft's recent "Schools 2000" (I think that was the name, but possibly not) program, for instance, where it gets a monopoly in every school, and cases where the best bidders on non-IT contracts have been told that they "said all the right things, except that they didn't use the word 'Microsoft'".
Unfortunately it's easy for a country to say it supports open standards, just as it's easy for a country to say it's "helping" in Iraq. Reality is often much different.
When it comes to technology politicians are clueless, with few exceptions. However, the fact that he bothers to pander to someone about it means that the issue has made at least some headway.
FAQs are evil.
One shall speak only if what one has to say is more beautiful than silence
Of course I realise it's just a cheap joke. But I am always puzzled by the contradictory sentiment given by our North American readers. They are always the first to advocate ones freedom to act in matters of employment with "If you don't like a job then go find another". Yet they ridicule the French and other countries whos workers act, to less radical degree, by temporarily withdrawing their services in protest at single issues in the workplace. Do people in the USA have no sense of proportion? Are they conditioned to believe that protesting is somehow less dignified than quitting? Or are they just racists?
I believe there is a strong connection between the Puritan work ethic and the Stockholm effect in conditions of kidnap. To some degree it's culturally normal for the North American to bond with his abuser, to tolerate abuse, to see those who reject abuse as weak and those who organise to collecitvely challenge abuse as "troublemakers". The puzzle, is that this flies directly against their stated values of freedom and democracy.
Since the French tend to reverse everything when translating from English, wouldn't Office Open XML become Open Office XML (or possibly XML Open Office)? Am I the only one who things MS had a major case of trademark infringement on this one calling their format Office Open XML? Every Time I see OOXML, I have to stop and think and then remember that it's not related to OpenOffice.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Here is my take on it as a libertarian/liberal.
We recognize that left unchecked, the workers will destroy the business. They have essentially done that in the united states. People with high school degrees used collective bargaining to get college level wages and even better retirement plans. Now the industry is collapsing under that weight.
We also recognize that the executive class is currently unchecked and looting and pillaging our large businesses at grossly abusive rates ( I personally cannot see the justification for paying *ANYONE* over about $10 million a year-- much less giving them $150+ million dollars for being fired).
America is big on capitalism. When constrained by social values, it produces a very good outcome. Unproductive activities are terminated fairly rapidly (and everyone loses their job). Costs are aggressively reduced. Until recently the result was more wealth for us on average with some short term damage to a lot, and a small group people's lives destroyed periodically as buggy whips, or osbourne's or whatever went out of fashion.
We also see that socialism will grow to the point that a lot of society becomes unproductive and leeches off of the working classes. Our welfare system was reaching a point that many people born in it, died in it and had more children who would enter the system and keep it expanding.
Until fairly recently, when the capitol requirements became so high and the existing businesses successfully set up fairly high barriers to new competition, it was fairly easy for an american who wanted to be rich to get out and start a business and make it work.
As the rich get a stranglehold on the company- as the republicans become identified with corporations and the wealthy more than with religious and ethical causes- this is going to change. I expect us to swing hard left very soon. High taxes on the rich, limits on executive compensation, limits on corporate power, stronger better social services nets.
Personally, i think the french have it right. I prefer to work 37 hour weeks myself and usually find a way too. It is ridiculous that after decades of constant productivity improvements we STILL have to work 8 hours a day to earn a living- I suppose it is an artifact of the 24 hour day. 7 hours is reasonable but perhaps 6 hours is what we should drive for- or 8 hours 4 days a week.
I was talking to a labor lawyer on a flight last year and he said that labor's ability to strike effectively in the us has basically been removed. For example- you can't do industry strikes if I understand him correctly.
So if you want to strike against amalgamated butter, all the other butter companies keep churning it out. Back in the 60's, you could shut down butter production period by striking at all companies- and even the butter delivery companies.
We are not conditioned to see striking as worse than quitting. We have less unions tho. So when a union effectively strikes and takes away our ability to get garbage collected or police protection- we just get pissed at the strikers. And really- there is an ongoing debate on whether vital services people should have a right to strike.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.