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.'"
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.
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.