Slashdot Mirror


OOXML's 662 Resolutions

Rob Isn't Weird writes "Microsoft has finally responded to the resolutions concerning OOXML (or 662 of them at any rate). The only problem? The JTC1 NBs who are deciding OOXML's fate have to download 662 individual PDFs from a slow, password-protected server; and many have had trouble getting the password. Don't misunderstand the ECMA's intent, though: there would have been 662 OOXML files if they had wanted to make it hard for people to read and criticize the responses. Thanks to the Internet, other interested parties have put all 662 resolutions online in a searchable, taggable format and are requesting that everyone interested help examine them. That means you, Slashdot."

166 comments

  1. Hrmph. by Kingrames · · Score: 2, Funny

    Looks like they weren't prepared for slashdot after all.

    Is there a mirror to be found?

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    1. Re:Hrmph. by antonyb · · Score: 1
      Thanks for sharing that with us.

      Ant.

    2. Re:Hrmph. by mattbee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Customer's ISP here - just loaning this chap's virtual machine some more memory to deal with the hoardes. Ah there, it's back up again and using no swap, hooray. Apache might be hitting its MaxClients limit as well, I'll keep an eye on it :)

      --
      Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
    3. Re:Hrmph. by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Funny

      Looks like they weren't prepared for slashdot after all.

      Yet another server casualty that could have been prevented with BitTorrent.
    4. Re:Hrmph. by erayd · · Score: 1

      Nice to see there are still some good ISPs left out there... Plenty would have just left the VPS to melt, never mind about the impact on the poor customer who got slashdotted.

      --
      Forget world peace, bring on -1 pointless
    5. Re:Hrmph. by SQLGuru · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's a selling point....

      "Our company monitors Slashdot and keeps you running even when the Slashdot effect kicks in." (Wouldn't you like *YOUR* job to involve reading Slashdot.....well on purpose.)

      Layne

    6. Re:Hrmph. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for being supporting of your customer in this fashion - very impressive!

    7. Re:Hrmph. by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      Said customer may not have wanted it published that his site runs on a virtual machine rather than his own dedicated systems.

    8. Re:Hrmph. by JeffSchwab · · Score: 1

      Would you get letters after your name, like nurses get RN? "Joe Blow, RTFA." Seriously, I bet it would feel just like being a literary critic, but without the groupies.

  2. I like the country count. by sethawoolley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Note the number of comments submitted by the smaller countries that have taken up open source efforts. Colombia, Venezuela, etc.

    Goes to show a few people CAN make a difference.

    1. Re:I like the country count. by palegray.net · · Score: 1

      As evidenced in politics, provided the "few" make enough noise and communicate amongst themselves efficiently, they can definitely have an influence over issues that have long-term impact. An unfortunate side effect is the fact that this works both ways...

    2. Re:I like the country count. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      ...due to a lack of genetic biodiversity... Why the PC terms? It's called inbreeding. I should know, I'm from another people that was almost wiped by European diseases that we couldn't handle.
    3. Re:I like the country count. by sethawoolley · · Score: 1, Informative

      ...due to a lack of genetic biodiversity... Why the PC terms? It's called inbreeding. I should know, I'm from another people that was almost wiped by European diseases that we couldn't handle. They weren't trying to in-breed, unlike your bunch ;-). They just never had contact with any new migrations after the land bridge closed up (three or four waves of migration from 40k to 10k years ago are represented in their mitochondrial DNA). With a 28% chance of having a near identical immune system as somebody else, versus 2% for Europeans, the virulence was unheard of, even by European standards.

      Though, they main reason they're around today in some form is due to hybridization with the new visitors from Europe. I guess that's a positive way of looking at it.

      OK, ok. I won't be so P.C...

      They were raped by the conquistadors, their new lords and masters.
    4. Re:I like the country count. by Elektroschock · · Score: 1
      Yes, of course you can make a difference and help to kill the standard. More than 70 000 people signed the petition. What concerns me are the attempts of Microsoft to use Slashdot as their communication channel and kill all critical discussions. We had the same in Wikipedia.

      Actually it the whole contribution of "Rob isn't Weird" is pointless. Of course Microsoft is absolutely free to publish it comments resolutions but they would be pointless anyway

      The real question that matters is if your national Committee is really working on the comments and proposes resolutions for the Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM). ECMA as its proxy or Microsoft as the originator are just third parties in the Ballot Resolution Meeting. The national bodies matter and they will take a decision which comments to resolve.

      Surprisingly some nations, just to name Ireland and Portugal are represented by Microsoft.

      Microsoft is free to leak its comment resolutions to DIS29500.org. If third parties do so this would give them means of legal action against the website of Alan. I just received an email from Benjamin Henrion, the campaign leader against Open XML:

      ...
      Microsoft is trying by all means to get its "standard" adopted without
      substantial changes despite of its thousands of officially reported
      technical flaws and the pre-existence of ISO 26300:2006 (OpenDocument,
      ODF) as the most appropriate international standard for the
      representation of office documents.

      By Dec 11 2007 delegates from your National Standard Office who will
      participate in the BRM have to be announced to ISO. At least Portugal
      and Ireland will be represented by Microsoft. In many other countries,
      we know that Microsoft gold partners are proposing themselves as heads
      of national delegations. Many of them will prevail if we do not take
      action.


      Are my national delegates for the BRM are independent from Microsoft? I don't know. At least our Committee is totally stuffed with them and no substancial comments were submitted. It is a great farce. Will Steve Ballmer become the Ballot Resolution Meeting representative of Cote d'Ivoire?
  3. It seems their wordpress has asploded. by kcbanner · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Their database seems to have gone into "oh god please no more" mode.

    --
    Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
    1. Re:It seems their wordpress has asploded. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aka - Slashdot/Microsoft/Bluescreen/Redscreen/chairinameeting mode.

  4. Proof by goingforaslash · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The JTC1 NBs who are deciding OOXML's fate have to download 662 individual PDFs from a slow, password-protected server; and many have had trouble getting the password. See, they are a bunch of fuckheads. Just childish and spiteful!!
    1. Re:Proof by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      While I wouldn't quite have put it in those terms, I too am quite surprised by the completely childish attitude of MS. What's wrong with those people ? Was making one file that hard ?

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    2. Re:Proof by Wraith,+The · · Score: 1

      If you make one file than any mistake or discussion on the reponse could lead to a entirly new document. Having seprate documents is easy for the ballot resolution. It can lead to a consensus where the original submitted text is amended with a (large) number of PDF's to be the result of the BRM and the National bodies can then vote on that set of reponses. If the coments were in one document there would have to be a new document created with the reponses the BRM agreed on (removing all responses the BRM will not agree on). This might be trouwblesome seeing as there is very limited time after the BRM concludes to make a new version and redistribute it. By using seperate documents the BRM meeting could on its conclusion have the original submitted text and a list of approved reponses ready by the end of the meet.

  5. I believe I speak for most of us.. by RuBLed · · Score: 5, Funny

    That means you, Slashdot.

    We don't RTFA much more those 662 files.

    - but

    We could comment on it now if you wish...
    We would download it anyway to archive the world's internet and determine the melting point of silicon in your everyday datacenter...
    1. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "What's the problem? What benefit do I get from reading through 662 file format comments?"

      A) I think you answered what the problem is. That "Open" file format only works on your closed system.

      B) Don't ask what the 662 comments can do for you but what you can do for the 662 comments.

    2. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      You might have year 1900 as leap year or not. You might get mathematically correct results from CEILING() or perhaps not.

      But maybe you just don't care as long as it loads into your Word.

    3. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by rpp3po · · Score: 4, Informative

      It does not even load in Microsoft's own Office 2004 for Mac for which they still aren't selling an alternative. Their OOXML converter is a silly joke. Convert an old Word XP HTML to Word 97 (doc) to Wordperfect to Word 95 to RTF and it will still look much better than the laughable output of their converter.

    4. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OOXML files seem to load fine in Word 2007 and 2003 (with the Office 2007 file format plugin). What's the problem?

      And you got modded Insightful for that? Jeez!!

      Remember! Microsoft is not the only company in the world, and data in documents do not belong to them. Also, the O in OOXML stands for Open, not proprietary.

      Seriously, something should be done to address the abuse of moderation... it's pathetic!

    5. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by Heir+Of+The+Mess · · Score: 0, Redundant

      The thing is, this is all some political game between governments and Microsoft. It's played out like this:

      Government person A wanted to stop being locked into Microsoft products.
      A was told to give a reason why.
      A came up with "Because it's not a open format. Information is controlled my MS".
      Policy was made that documents had to be in an open format
      Microsoft pulled a naming stunt putting "Open" in the name
      Policy was changed to format has to be an ISO standard
      Microsoft responds by pushing OOXML through ECMA then tried to back door it through ISO
      662 comments are thrown in
      slashdotters spend hours playing this new game
      ???
      Profit

      So MS has changed the game by producing paperwork. The idea has changed from using standards that don't belong to MS, to using MS standards that are ISO approved. Nice move, but the reality is that most people are just happy to load MS documents in MS Word the same as they have always done. MS Word isn't going to change much, and the original idea has been buried.

      I'd just prefer to play ProgressQuest.

      --
      Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
    6. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember! Microsoft is not the only company in the world, and data in documents do not belong to them. Also, the O in OOXML stands for Open, not proprietary.

      Microsoft thinks it stands for "OURS all OURS!"

    7. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by galoise · · Score: 1

      something it's done: it's called metamoderation.

      --
      entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
    8. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does not even load in Microsoft's own Office 2004 for Mac for which they still aren't selling an alternative.
      Just install bootcamp and buy windows XP and Microsoft Office 2007. You were given bootcamp for a reason, use it.
    9. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by rpp3po · · Score: 1

      Just install bootcamp and buy windows XP and Microsoft Office 2007. You were given bootcamp for a reason, use it. Yes, OOXML's world is so open, you have to reboot your machine into another proprietary operating system just to open a stupid office document.
    10. Re:I believe I speak for most of us.. by garbletext · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure you're being sarcastic. *Please* tell me you're being sarcastic.

  6. Still crap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From one, slow, crappy server to another, huh?

  7. Bill's 662 responses by Rebelgecko · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bill Gates actually had several more responses, but they forgot to upload 4 of the pdfs.

    --
    CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    1. Re:Bill's 662 responses by HerbieStone · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Bill Gates actually had several more responses, but they forgot to upload 4 of the pdfs.

      640 should be enough evil for anyone. ;)

    2. Re:Bill's 662 responses by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      I don't think we need the pdfs to see which four letters he wrote...

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  8. slashdotted by spatialguy · · Score: 1

    662 was just too much...

    1. Re:slashdotted by RLiegh · · Score: 5, Funny

      Indeed. 640 Resolutions should be enough for anyone.

    2. Re:Slashdotted by martinlp · · Score: 1

      "Well you're not missing much because the 662 responses are mostly grammatical fixes and the big stuff is yet to come. Read the country comments at iso-vote.com/comments"

      Don't know how you searched but I searched for "South Africa" and the comments that came up certainly are not grammatical fixes. Makes me proud to be a South African!

    3. Re:slashdotted by Tejin · · Score: 0

      I think you'll find that there were actually 100 000 resolutions. Must be a conversion error...

      --
      The seekers do no need truth, the seekers do find truth and the finding do be painful
  9. This means a lot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ... especially coming from a full-time salaried employee of International Business Machines, who by cosmic coincidence recently released a product that uses ODF and competes (or tries to compete) Microsoft Office.

    I must've missed the memo that declared "evangelism" as the new corporate-sponsored FUD. But boy, it does feel wholesome.

    1. Re:This means a lot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't worry, you'll be alright, evangelism is fine for all but IBMs lawyers, which coincidently graduate from the same school microsoft programmers come from (a hard to find Ivy league school that teaches lichdom, among other dark arts).

    2. Re:This means a lot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the causation works the other way around? Maybe he works for IBM because they're responsible for producing a series of products that he thinks suck less than the alternatives.

    3. Re:This means a lot... by jkrise · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This means a lot...especially coming from a full-time salaried employee of International Business Machines,

      So what? Don't you think an open dialogue between competitors is much better than shady backroom dealings that screw the customer?

      who by cosmic coincidence recently released a product that uses ODF and competes (or tries to compete) Microsoft Office.

      ODF was the first to be recognised as an ISO standard, it's MS that's trying to compete and catch up... and making a very bad attempt of it, besides.

      I must've missed the memo that declared "evangelism" as the new corporate-sponsored FUD. But boy, it does feel wholesome.

      If it's FUD, why not expose it by refuting any opinions in the article. Not every corporate-sponsored research is FUD... not every company is Microsoft! Maybe you are a full-time paid shill for them?

      --
      If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    4. Re:This means a lot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Maybe you are a full-time paid shill for them?

      Why is it that anyone who disagrees with the Slashdot groupthink and annoying little trolls like you must be employed by Microsoft? Is that some sort of security blanket you carry around to survive on the internets or something?

      Seriously, go back to IRC.

    5. Re:This means a lot... by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Why is it that anyone who disagrees with the Slashdot groupthink and annoying little trolls like you must be employed by Microsoft? Is that some sort of security blanket you carry around to survive on the internets or something?
      Would you please respond to the other sentences, I am far more interested in your responses to those.
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    6. Re:This means a lot... by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe you are a full-time paid shill for them?

      Why is it that anyone who disagrees with the Slashdot groupthink and annoying little trolls like you must be employed by Microsoft? Is that some sort of security blanket you carry around to survive on the internets or something?

      Seriously, go back to IRC.

      I think you missed the point of that statement. The original comment said that the criticisms aren't valid because they come from an IBM employee. The response made it rather clear how ridiculous it is to base the validity of a comment solely on the commenter's employer.
    7. Re:This means a lot... by Wraith,+The · · Score: 1

      Rob Weir is indeed an employee from IBM known for his anti-ooxml blogposts. And it seems his effort of spreading anti-ooxml information has now transgressed into the Google search engine. Google apperantly refuses to index Office Open XML files. See: http://ooxmlhoaxes.blogspot.com/2007/12/ooxml-google-search-engine-supports-ibm.html Where Google indexes tons or arbitrary fileformats it manages to find only 1 percent of Office Open XML files on the web.

    8. Re:This means a lot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I don't have any responses to those other points. Shills don't argue with logic, only FUD, at least that is what Microsoft taught me.

    9. Re:This means a lot... by mugnyte · · Score: 1


        Interesting. You decode on "personal attack" as a rebuttal to the terms of the information staging. You fail to address the actual issue in any way. In total, you reinforce the post's sentiment, rather than negating it: That spitefully subverting the process will somehow aid in its public perception.

        I daresay you are the same person. Well done sir.

    10. Re:This means a lot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi Bill. Slow day at the office?

  10. obligitory anti-MS line.... by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 5, Funny

    662 Resolutions ought to be enough for anybody.

    --
    -I only code in BASIC.-
    1. Re:obligitory anti-MS line.... by zoefff · · Score: 1

      Did you look at the dupe amount: 652. Leaves that us with only ten issues here?

  11. 662 strikes against OOXML? by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I thought 640 K would be enough for anyone.

    1. Re:662 strikes against OOXML? by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 1

      640K?

      oh god, can you imagine having to go through and open 640 000 seperate password-protected PDF files.

      If that were to happen, people on slashdot might start accusing Microsoft of being evil.

      --
      -I only code in BASIC.-
    2. Re:662 strikes against OOXML? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well then we've still got 657,258 complaints to spare, haven't we?

    3. Re:662 strikes against OOXML? by YaroMan86 · · Score: 1

      Now, I might possibly be wrong... but aren't people doing that anyway?

      Or was all the anti-Vista and anti-OOXML actually religious praise for Microsoft?

      Sometimes I with /. would give us a handbook so we can tell if we like Microsoft or not.

  12. Don't misunderstand the ECMA's intent, though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't misunderstand the ECMA's intent, though: there would have been 662 OOXML files if they had wanted to make it hard for people to read and criticize the responses.

    huh???

    1. Re:Don't misunderstand the ECMA's intent, though by andruk · · Score: 0

      Whoosh.

      The author is making a joke/funny. The ECMA is being jack#$$*$ and releasing 662 PDFs from a password-protected webpage on a slow server, so it is difficult to get to the complaints and responses about OOXML. The author is being sarcastic when he says "there would have been 662 OOXML files if they had wanted to make it hard for people to read and criticize the responses" because, the current process makes it hard for people to read and criticize the responses. The joke lies in the fact that the ECMA could have released the document as 662 OOXML documents, making it nigh impossible for anybody to read them (unless they had MS Office 2007, or OpenOffice with the OOXML reader).

      At least this is what I understood it to be. What do I know?

      Don't worry bro, it's late here too.

  13. Slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well you're not missing much because the 662 responses are mostly grammatical fixes and the big stuff is yet to come. Read the country comments at iso-vote.com/comments

  14. Way to go posting the link on slashdot by mwc28 · · Score: 1

    After someone did all that hard work to get them all in a single place for others some genius decides to publicise the document on slashdot, end result nobody can access them .... back to square one!

    1. Re:Way to go posting the link on slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's what I don't understand:

      Legend has it that no one on /. RTFA's. Yet, that would imply there is no /. effect.

      Who, then, is clicking the links so many times?

    2. Re:Way to go posting the link on slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Me. Sorry.

    3. Re:Way to go posting the link on slashdot by raynet · · Score: 1

      I don't read the articles that are linked from Slashdot, I just click on the link to see the pretty pictures and banners.

      --
      - Raynet --> .
  15. 662 responses? by rachit · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where are the other four?

  16. Open by clarkn0va · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From Rob Weir's blog:

    Yes, the comments and the resolutions to the comments are on two different web sites with two different passwords
    Bravo. How proud then is Ecma of these 662 resolutions? Remember, kids, the "O" in OOXML stands for "Open".

    db

    --
    I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
    1. Re:Open by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which "O" ??

    2. Re:Open by Fast+Thick+Pants · · Score: 1

      The second O. It's "Office Open XML", though they also just say "Open XML". Putting the adjective after the noun feels so forced that it's embarrassingly sleazy; it's obviously intended to be confused with the deprecated OpenOffice.org XML format, which was often simply called "OpenOffice XML".

      It's already confusing enough...

      • Office Open XML (MS-OOXML) text files have extension .docx and replace legacy blob files with extension .doc, all developed by Microsoft. MS-OOXML is natively supported in Office 2007, and MS offers plugins that add support to all versions back to Office 2000. It's supported by a couple of third-party applications such as NeoOffice and the "Novell Edition" of OpenOffice.org.
      • OpenDocument text files have extension .odt, and are based on the "OpenOffice.org XML" format developed by the OpenOffice.org project, based in turn on the StarOffice file format. Sun Microsystems is pretty much running this show. OpenOffice.org is considered a reference implementation for the OpenDocument format (aka ODF, aka OASIS OpenDocument.) Other products that support ODF include KOffice, AbiWord, IBM's new beta of Lotus Symphony, Google Docs, and, using any one of four different plugin projects, Microsoft Office.
      And that's just the word processing text formats, there's also graphics, spreadsheet, presentation, etc.
    3. Re:Open by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the second "O" stands for "offending".

  17. sorry about the slashdotting by dominux · · Score: 5, Funny

    just woke up to find the server not responding, checked slashdot whilst starting to fix it . . . OH SHIT, now I know why it is down! I will try to keep it up.

    1. Re:sorry about the slashdotting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw getting the server up.... just post the comments here. You'll never have the bandwidth /. does and I'm sure they'd love to host it anyway.

    2. Re:sorry about the slashdotting by Crizp · · Score: 1

      I think your host graciously loaned you some memory and/or cpu for your vhost a bit farther up :)

    3. Re:sorry about the slashdotting by dominux · · Score: 1

      yes, I asked them to help. Bytemark are great!

  18. This has been our plan all along... by Osrin · · Score: 1

    I can confirm that Microsoft's plan all along was to get Rob to publish something like this, then have it pushed to /. to ensure that all sites quickly become unavailable! Hopefully, normal service should be resumed shortly.

  19. Interesting 'resolution'.... still confusing! by jkrise · · Score: 5, Informative
    FTA: "The CHAR() function converts an integer into a character. But no character set was defined in the DIS to govern this conversion. Microsoft clarrified tis saying that the function uses the "Macintosh character set"on the Mac and ANSI on all other platforms."

    That means the same soon-to-be-ISO-standard OOXML file can be interpreted differently, depending on the 'platform' in which it is being used / read! Typical Microsoft rubbish.... and AGAIN!

    Also Rob responds to a query: "Even their correction is ambiguous. What is the "MacIntosh Character Set"? There is Mac OS Roman, MacCyrillic, MacIcelandic, Mac Central European, and with OS X we have UTF-8 as the default." Hilarious!

    And again, probing a bit deeper into the ANSI character set for Windows... there's no such thing apparently:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI

    In Microsoft Windows, the phrase "ANSI" refers to the Windows ANSI code pages (even though they are not ANSI standards[1]). Most of these are fixed width, though some characters for ideographic languages are variable width. Since these characters are based on a draft of the ISO-8859 series, some of Microsoft's symbols are visually very similar to the ISO symbols, leading many to falsely assume that they are identical. To top it all, quoting from a response:

    One thing to note here is that MS explicitly do not support UTF-8 as an non-UCS2 encoding[1], while most Linux distributions are moving towards putting everything in UTF-8. So it would likely be the case in the near future that Linux and Windows users would not share a common platform character set, even if they spoke the same language. (e.g. Windows English British in Windows-1252, and Linux en_GB.UTF-8) And I thought Vista was the most confusing stuff from Microsoft!
    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    1. Re:Interesting 'resolution'.... still confusing! by someone1234 · · Score: 1

      What other platform you talk about? I guess M$'s intention is to have a single platform. For customer's benefit.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    2. Re:Interesting 'resolution'.... still confusing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      In Microsoft Windows, the phrase "ANSI" refers to the Windows ANSI code pages (even though they are not ANSI standards...

      I think Microsoft should rename its text encoding as Windows Text Format... or WTF! Everyone can undesrtand exactly what WTF means, without any ambiguity! Hell.. even rename OOXML as WTFML, no need to look it up on Wikpedia to understand!

    3. Re:Interesting 'resolution'.... still confusing! by SnprBoB86 · · Score: 1
      Although I work for Microsoft, I really have no personal interest in whether or not OOXML becomes a standard.

      I do, however, enjoy playing devil's advocate (and believe me, I do the same in support of non-MS tech at work).

      That means the same soon-to-be-ISO-standard OOXML file can be interpreted differently, depending on the 'platform' in which it is being used / read! Typical Microsoft rubbish.... and AGAIN! This link gives me reason to believe that Brian Jones and his team have at least done their homework:

      http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/02/20/beyond-the-basics.aspx

      I'd rather a well-defined platform-specific behavior than an ill-defined application-specific behavior.

      On an unrelated note, here is some justification on why they "ignored" MathML ("ignored" is in quotes because they support it on the clipboard):
      http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2006/10/12/comparison-of-openxml-math-and-mathml.aspx
      I think this is a bit of a cop-out. They should have pushed for extensions in MathML to support what they need, but I do understand the time constraints of the commercial world vs the standards bodies, so I can understand why they didn't.
      --
      http://brandonbloom.name
    4. Re:Interesting 'resolution'.... still confusing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you're describing is a non-solution. It continues the existing ridiculous situation in which "standard" Microsoft Office files aren't meaningfully interoperable. "Our standard here is Microsoft Office". "Oh great, here's a file". "Oh, I can't open that. You need to buy a laptop that's identical to this one, make sure it has the German Windows XP, not Vista, and then install the company authorised Office. Then retype the document. Normally it'll work then"

      Microsoft has consistently preferred "this sort of works, fuck it, customers will only find out later" to "It's hard, let's take the time to do it right and we'll have to ship it in the next version". OOXML just continues that trend.

      It serves no purpose as an actual standard, it's just another iteration of the Office Productivity group's endless bait-and-switch "This version is more compatible, yeah, you'll wish you had it when you can't open other people's documents".

      It's not just what version of Windows, and Office you have, it's the locale settings, the size of your monitor, whether you installed any optional fonts, the translation you're using etc. Writing out all these parameters in XML doesn't change anything about the fact that Microsoft Office doesn't even interoperate with itself, let alone anything else. It's just a shame that the competition aren't any better.

    5. Re:Interesting 'resolution'.... still confusing! by cheros · · Score: 1

      Thanks - I'm going to call it like that from now on :-)

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  20. Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by dominux · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the site is a Wordpress blog on Apache and MySQL with Debian as the operating system. It is on a fairly well occupied server, it is actually running in a xen virtual machine. It has loads of bandwidth available, it is in a big datacentre in London. At the moment I can't SSH into the box, I am doing a reboot from the xen admin console (just saw it switch to runlevel 0 - it is running still, but very very slowly.) What settings should I tweak to help it stay up under the impressive load of a slashdot effect? I am going to get more of the host resources allocated to it later (more RAM for a start) but I am not sure what else I can do. I might turn off some of the logging (although I would like to see the logs for today).

    1. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      DO A BARREL ROLL (press z or r twice)

    2. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by ben0207 · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is the /. equivalent of the captains last words as he goes down with his ship.

      --
      cmd-q.co.uk - some sort of stupid fucking internet bullshit
    3. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by clarkn0va · · Score: 3, Informative
      Since it sounds like bandwidth isn't your problem, you can start by optimising your filesystem mount options for speed, particularly the partition carrying your log files, as these will be writing like crazy right now. For example, in /etc/fstab, for xfs use "noatime,nodiratime,logbufs=8". For reiserfs, "noatime,notail". Do mount -a to effect the changes right away.

      Just my 2 cents.

      db

      --
      I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
    4. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Install WP-Cache.

      Don't cache with Squid unless you fix WordPress http headers first.

    5. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by surfi · · Score: 2, Funny

      i would use round robin to redirect 50% of the traffic to any random pr0n site.. this would give you some time while keeping everyone happy

    6. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by BarlowBrad · · Score: 1

      Just read this a few hours ago, not sure if it helps or not but it certainly seems worthwhile. http://www.binaryfortress.com/2007/12/how-to-survive-a-traffic-spike-with-wordpress/

    7. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Varnish has enabled a Norwegian newspaper to handle over a million visits a day with only one server. It is FOSS. http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/

    8. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by Sangui5 · · Score: 1

      Your only problem is the dynamic content. Any halfway competently written webserver can deal with a much heavier rush than slashdot, *if* it is serving static pages. Since you probably don't have the time to switch to a Rails implementation, take empaler's advice: try to move as many of the pages as you can to a static setup. Especially the ones that you feel the /. crowd (or Digg, or Fark, or whatever) are likely to read. Of course your truly dynamic content has to stay dynamic, but if you cut back on the hits to to cgi, things will get much better.

    9. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since it is a virtual machine it shouldn't be to hard to clone it and stick the clone on another physical box. Than just setup round robin to direct to both boxes. Then again I've only worked with vmware before so I don't know about this one. I like to call it the FDDoS attack, Featured Distributed Denial of Service. Oddly enough I just wrote a comic about it, though I sadly forgot to mention Slashdot. And yes this is a little bit of self promotion so if you don't want to read a comic don't click.

    10. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by dominux · · Score: 1

      excellent suggestion, I will keep that in mind for the future. More ram seems to have done the trick though.

    11. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      mod_proxy can be your friend. There's probably no need to regenerate a whole page every single time it's requested.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    12. Re:Any suggestions to slashdotproof it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As said above with the comment on Squid the HTTP headers that wordpress generates will defeat any compliant HTTP cache.

  21. whilst the server is rebooting, a small correction by dominux · · Score: 4, Interesting

    on the site at the moment are the 3492 (ECMA say there are 3522, not sure where the extra ones came from) comments from the .zip file of .doc files of the country comments. About 750 or so (I would tell you exactly if I could see my site) have been classified. I think in my inbox there is a mail with a leak of the 622 responses, I would tell you for certain if my email server hadn't just been slashdotted. I will identify the 622 comments as soon as I can and we can all laugh at them together. I think the general format is "we agree . . . blah blah blah . . . we are not going to do anything about it"

  22. my suggestions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) always slashdot proof websites *before* the slashdot effect takes hold
    2) that's all I got so far...good luck. Most likely there are some good debian admins kicking around might take pity
    3) A year from now you'll look back and think this was funny, just keep that in mind...

  23. Please get an account by empaler · · Score: 3, Funny

    That would make it easier to filter out your comments.

  24. Re:Typical bureaucracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    4. Make a woman, or a homosexual, the bossman. You meant to write
    4. Promote whoever loves your cock the most, and will take it into your mouth with the shortest notice.
    Could very well be the same person.
  25. Wordpress is the problem by empaler · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wordpress is notorious for killing servers with heavy loads when there are many incoming connections. You could try making a temporary static page and disable Wordpress for a day or two; then in the comments section make a notice along the lines of "Sorry, due to server issues, commenting has been disabled until 2007-12-06".
    You could also see if CoralCache can help you out a smidgeon. Check this page for further details.

    Also, a piece of advice: don't sink money into an upgrade because you've been on /. frontpage once. If the load continues to be high, then yeah, go for it, but slashdotters have a short attention span. See a tale about slashdottings here

  26. Pardon the Language: Fuck ECMA by foo+fighter · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The only thing good ECMA is widely known for is ECMAscript. I'll assume everyone here knows that is Javascript (a.k.a. ECMA-262, ratified in 1999; 56-63 years ago in Internet Years). Otherwise, all ECMA is knowing for is taking Microsoft's money and then bending over.

    By this point ECMA should have as much pull with sovereign governments (and the populaces that grant them power) as the hand written standard for communicating standards via written language I have here beside me that I just wrote.

    That stupidity such as what is demonstrated here persists demonstrates the failure of geeks. I am a geek (for evidence, just ask my long suffering wife who succumbed to my deceit during the two years in college when I became "preppy" and thin to attract a mate; she has since mostly succumbed to the charms and advantages of marrying a smart person who isn't a cover model [such charms consist mostly of being able to fix broken things and provide enough comedic relief to save $50-$150/month on cable TV. Also, as Revenge of the Nerds taught us, we're great at sex because we think about it all the time.) and it is to my personal shame that Microsoft still has a monopoly on desktop operating systems and electronic document formats.

    Geeks! learn how to talk to people and convince them that your position is the correct one. THIS will be the most challenging yet rewarding effort of you life. This is our World War II.

    Doctorow is our Churchill. Lessig is our Roosevelt (the crippled one). I don't know who our Stalin is, but we're probably better off without him.

    A meme is beginning to grow that asks what have we done to live up to the precedent set by our grandparents?

    This will be the legacy we leave to our grandchildren (assuming we as a group learn how to convince the opposite sex to allow us to copulate with them in order to have grandchildren).

    --
    obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    1. Re:Pardon the Language: Fuck ECMA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know who our Stalin is


      Is it Theo?

    2. Re:Pardon the Language: Fuck ECMA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anger management dude, anger management.

    3. Re:Pardon the Language: Fuck ECMA by russotto · · Score: 1

      Geeks! learn how to talk to people and convince them that your position is the correct one. THIS will be the most challenging yet rewarding effort of you life. This is our World War II.


      It's a defining characteristic of geeks that we cannot do that. (except in the context of fraud, i.e. "social engineering")

      Further, if we could, our interests would naturally become aligned with the other persuasive people in the world (politicians, salespeople, etc) rather than with geeks. And the status quo ante would thus remain unchanged, except that the number of geeks would become reduced.

      Doctorow is our Churchill. Lessig is our Roosevelt (the crippled one). I don't know who our Stalin is, but we're probably better off without him.

      Is it really not obvious? Gates himself, of course.
    4. Re:Pardon the Language: Fuck ECMA by TwinkieStix · · Score: 1

      There was a Stallman in WWII?

  27. Better: WP-supercache by Alphager · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://ocaoimh.ie/wp-super-cache/ ! Does not work with the standard debian-install of wordpress (plugin does not like symlinks) !

  28. sounds good by dominux · · Score: 1

    as soon as I can get it up for a few minutes I will install that.

    1. Re:sounds good by andruk · · Score: 0

      I did not read that the way I should have.

  29. and the problem is... ? by m2943 · · Score: 1

    I must've missed the memo that declared "evangelism" as the new corporate-sponsored FUD. But boy, it does feel wholesome.

    Where in the article do you see "evangelism"? Weir is stating a bunch of relevant facts and providing a bunch of useful pointers. What is wrong with that?

    1. Re:and the problem is... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess - you've never actually read his blog until today. Right?

    2. Re:and the problem is... ? by m2943 · · Score: 1

      Let me guess - you've never actually read his blog until today. Right?

      No, I haven't. How is that relevant? His posting was factual and to the point; what's the problem with that?

  30. ...It kind of does. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sometimes, you don't have to consider the source.

    2+2 is always 4. You may disagree with everything I stand for; you may think I represent evil incarnate, or that I'm just lazy hippie scum; but if I say "2+2=4", you kind of have to agree with me.

    So, unless you're actually going to dispute the fact that:

    • There are 662 separate PDFs
    • The comments and the resolutions to the comments are on completely separate pages
    • The whole thing is password-protected

    Unless there's something factually wrong with that, pretty much anyone can independently figure out that the process sucks giant donkey balls.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    1. Re:...It kind of does. by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      2+2 is always 4
      Report to room 101.
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    2. Re:...It kind of does. by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      2+2 is always 4 Except for large values of 2, then it's 5.
    3. Re:...It kind of does. by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "sucks giant donkey balls"

      What's sad is that there is a probably a video in the internet of someone doing just that.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    4. Re:...It kind of does. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 + 2 = 7 you lazy nazi hippy scum!

    5. Re:...It kind of does. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but if I say "2+2=4", you kind of have to agree with me. No I don't. In base 3 it would be 11. However, the sucking giant donkey balls is still correct. :P
    6. Re:...It kind of does. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      I'll concede that, because I'm too lazy to look up how to denote base in mathematics :P

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  31. The response. by halcyon1234 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Given Microsoft's attitude towards the process, I'm assuming the response was "Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, you're cool, and fuck you, I'm out!"

    1. Re:The response. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Loveable Old James! Oh wait, there was no loveable Old James...

    2. Re:The response. by TheSciBoy · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean "Screw you guys, I'm going home"

      --
      Badgers, we don't need no stinking badgers! - UHF
    3. Re:The response. by empaler · · Score: 1
  32. MS Tools by pembo13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why doesn't Microsoft use their super productive RAD tools to give the comments/resolutions in multiple formats? Why does some (well intentioned) dude have to do all the work himself? I have been led to believe that Microsoft has several hundred employees and billions of dollars, and their marketting people assure me that Visual Studio .NET + ASP.NET + SQL Server are the best things since the invention of the internet. Surely they should be able to slap together a web app with their own tools, _and_ still have a button/link which gives the results as an archive of multiple .doc files.

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:MS Tools by andruk · · Score: 0

      ...and their marketting (sic) people assure me...
      (emphasis mine).

      While their are many good tools available for doing just that, the problem that Microsoft has is that by using those tools, they are admitting that other people can *gasp* code well (and is therefore an enemy). This has the potential for Microsoft to stumble across somebody's great script, with the owner unwilling to sellout *cough* I mean join forces with Microsoft to develop an all-encompassing solution that everybody can enjoy. Microsoft is afraid of this solution (normal people just call it GNU/Linux) because it means that they will not buy another computer with Windows pre-installed.

      And OMFG, I just tried to make a joke, but it turned out to be true and unfunny. I should probably stop drinking and go to bed.

      *Ducks chairs as I head for bed in 3...2...1....*
  33. Doesn't address the issue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've now got me wondering if maybe both formats suck, but neither of the two pages you linked to have any rationale for why Unicode -- and UTF8 in particular -- were not used.

    On a completely unrelated note, if Microsoft is to blame for these HD-DVD specs, why is it that not only is no text compression supported anywhere (no gzip), but all Javascript files (maybe all text files period) must be UTF-16? (Actually, I suspect it has something to do with making a particular XML implementation easier, but the XML itself can be UTF-8.) And, in a perverse twist, it does try to support existing standards -- the DOM level 2 support is decent -- but why, oh why, does it taunt us by pretending to support XPath?

    Then again, Microsoft is certainly not the only company who put that spec together, so meh.

    Back to OOXML... in what world does "Beyond the scope of this document, go test it out in this obsolete/extinct piece of software on this obsolete/extinct platform to see what we mean" constitute "partially documenting"? I would call that "Documenting exactly what we refused to document." I'd rather have undocumented behavior that I can at least read the source code for than "partially documented" behavior that I have to take a wild guess at.

  34. Sharepoint by Sweetshark · · Score: 1

    Yeah, host it on MS Sharepoint.

  35. Sharepoint: embracing and extending Intranets by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 1
    I was really dismayed when I got on my new employer's Intranet, only to find that Sharepoint just shares Word .doc files. WTF?

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  36. advice for moderators: offtopic or overrated? by sethawoolley · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    if you don't like somebody's reply to an offtopic/hijacking/flamebait post, the best thing to do is to rate it "overrated", that way it doesn't go into moderation as an offtopic post, because, well, it was on the hijacked topic. That's the beauty of threading, isn't it -- topics can change.

    Overrated simply means, relative to its current score, it's not something somebody browsing at what it's currently scored at would expect.

    I "think" that's what the offtopic moderator wanted to say. Or they just got confused because my reply showed up underneath another topic such that the only way you can tell it's really a reply to a different topic was that there were double angle-lines that are easy to miss.

    You can also choose not to read it instead of moderating. Perhaps there should be an option to hide all children modded-down topics in slashcode.

    1. Re:advice for moderators: offtopic or overrated? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Or they just got confused because my reply showed up underneath another topic such that the only way you can tell it's really a reply to a different topic was that there were double angle-lines that are easy to miss. We can take this to my journal.
  37. Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    US - 272

    An XML markup cannot be "fully compatible" with an "investment"

    Remove the marketing fluff
    Somebody really DO want OOXML to be fixed!
  38. Market forces may decide by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 1

    With all the fighting and bickering with the OOXML and document standards the market may eventually decide this anyway.

    At some point people will grow tired of the politics of this so-called debate and the issue will become completely irrelevant.

    In this instance I'm not sure if letting market forces decide which format it will use because Microsoft Office is the market anyway.

    Actually maybe this is Microsoft's plan all along:
            If their document spec (in it's original form) had made it through the standards process - win for Microsoft
            If there were objections to it, obscure and delay the whole standards process and implement the spec through Microsoft Office anyway - win for Microsoft

    Win-Win for Microsoft!

            Of course this would mean a Lose-Lose situation to everybody else - Microsoft maintain their lock on the market and an obscure standard becomes a nightmare to implement for everyone else.

    It's a pity a company has to act this way - If they actually cooperated with everyone Microsoft could influence the I.T. industry in a positive way.(If they weren't so blinkered by Windows - I'm 'looking' at you Mr Ballmer!)

    1. Re:Market forces may decide by Tranzistors · · Score: 1

      In the heat of the battle it is easy to forget the ODF - I guess the only "lose" moment for MS

  39. It takes but one evangelist to change the world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like you missed that memo too, welcome to obscurity!

    rgds

  40. It takes but one evangelist to change the world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This means you must have missed this memo too, welcome to obscurity!

    rgds

  41. chmod by spatialguy · · Score: 1

    Nirvana:~/stuff bill$ chmod 662 reolutions.pdf
    Nirvana:~/stuff bill$ ls -hal
    -rw-rw--w- 1 bill bill 42M Nov 30 9:58 resolutions.pdf
    "Ha, that'll teach them. They can edit, but not read!"

    "Hm, on second thought..."
    Nirvana:~/stuff bill$ split -b 64k resolutions.pdf
    "Memo to myself: Find somebody to hide it on the internet..."

  42. Very interesting amendment, from USA no less!! by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Would have sworn it is a comment on a slashdot thread! Way to go Alan Bell!! 3 cheers.
    - - - - - -
    US - 270

    Naming DIS 29500: The current name of DIS 29500, Office Open XML is seriously misleading in several respects. First, it is not a document format based on XML but rather an XML representation of a legacy document format with particular processing semantics. Second, reference should not be made to commercial products and clearly "Office" in the title of this proposal is meant as a reference to Microsoft Office. Lastly, the proposal is no more or less open than any other ISO proposal and so "Open" is meaningless in this context.

    It is suggested that a new name be chosen for the proposal that reflects its goal of representing and continuing a legacy document format as represented in XML. Such a name should not carry an implied reference to a Microsoft product nor should it use the term "open." One possible name would be: Legacy Document Formats Represented in XML. The principles developed from this effort might well prove effective for other legacy document formats that should be represented in XML.

    DIS 29500

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Very interesting amendment, from USA no less!! by akirapill · · Score: 1

      ouch. Although LDFRXML doesn't quite have that same ring to it, does it? I think he's dead on, and maybe lemonade can come from these lemons if MS decided to focus this format as a standard for legacy documents rather than a as weapon against FOSS.

    2. Re:Very interesting amendment, from USA no less!! by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      While techically true, it will never fly. I'll stick to calling it MOOXML though, both because of the MS Office origin and in reference to the amount of bullshit MS has spewed about it.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    3. Re:Very interesting amendment, from USA no less!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOOXML will certainly get the cow vote.

  43. get a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks to the Internet, other interested parties have put all 662 resolutions online in a searchable, taggable format and are requesting that everyone interested help examine them. That means you, Slashdot.

    yeah, just what we need... the 99% of slashdot who's real understanding of technology is a gimmick and not a science to be offering in their 0.02 on the issue. how many times can we read 'micro$oft is teh fuktahd!' before we realize how much of a biased, nonscientific joke this place is?

  44. 662? Not 666? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would've bet anything that 666 was the number.

  45. it seems to be holding now with a bit more RAM by dominux · · Score: 1

    thanks to Bytemark for sorting it out, we now have 450MB of RAM, up from 128 this morning. It is serving up over three thousand hits per hour, about one hit per second on average, and they are complicated pages. I think I will probably install wp-cache or something, but right now it is working and I don't want to touch it!

  46. Some body Fix that comma error!! by mehemiah · · Score: 1

    "Don't misunderstand the ECMA's intent, though: there" 'though' is not needed here. sure the comma sets it apart from the sentence but it stops from reading it fluidly.

  47. BitTorrent for web sites? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Yet another server casualty that could have been prevented with BitTorrent. BitTorrent is designed for unchanging large files (>10 MB) or unchanging large folders. How, may I ask, would BitTorrent help with much smaller files such as HTML files, image files up to 0.1 Mpx used in most web pages, and PDFs containing text (not scans of printed material)? How would BitTorrent help distribute pages that are updated with news weekly or more often? And how does one hook a web browser up to BitTorrent?
    1. Re:BitTorrent for web sites? by garbletext · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's fair to say that BT is "designed" for large files, it's just most commonly used for those because they represent a bandwidth challenge more often. In this case, the document to be served is both unchanging and hobbled by bandwidth issues. Bittorrent has a configurable block size and is very efficient at distributing small files, even in a situation with lots of leechers, since in the time it would take to shut down your client right away, you'll still upload several times the amount you downloaded.

    2. Re:BitTorrent for web sites? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      BitTorrent is designed for unchanging large files (>10 MB) or unchanging large folders. How, may I ask, would BitTorrent help with much smaller files such as HTML files, image files up to 0.1 Mpx used in most web pages, and PDFs containing text (not scans of printed material)?
      Even PDFs of printed text are not always tiny files due to all the formatting. Now take this size and multiply it by 662, and you'll see an archive that easily justifies torrent distribution.

      How would BitTorrent help distribute pages that are updated with news weekly or more often?
      Are these resolutions going to be updated that often? Let's make sure we're using arguements that actually apply to a situation, okay?
    3. Re:BitTorrent for web sites? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Are these resolutions going to be updated that often? These resolutions are not, but the blog page about them is. Last time I checked, vanilla WordPress doesn't come with the caching extension to make WordPress less of a CPU hog, so a lot of WordPress users aren't prepared for a visit from Digg, Fark, or Slashdot.
    4. Re:BitTorrent for web sites? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      These resolutions are not, but the blog page about them is.

      Yes, and I wasn't talking about the blog. I was talking about the avalanche of PDFs online, Requiring a password few people can obtain and hosted on a server that cannot handle the traffic load it's contents would attract. A single archive of them could have been much more available if distributed as a torrent.
  48. Word95 by UdoKeir · · Score: 1

    Here are the responses to that oft-reported Word95 kludge: http://www.dis29500.org/?s=word95

    Interesting that the responses look like they were written by different people.

  49. I'm not Rob, I don't work for IBM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > especially coming from a full-time salaried employee of International Business Machines, who by cosmic coincidence recently released a product that uses ODF and competes (or tries to compete) Microsoft Office.

    Actually, no. I'm the submitter, not Rob. I just read his blog, I've never worked for IBM. The closest I came is that I gave an IBM guy a resume once or twice at a job fair, but I never got further than that. My real job is tech support. That's my interest in avoiding OOXML: I don't want to have to support it.

    BTW, you may have noticed me posting the same joke about 662 OOXML files over there. I'm the same anonymous guy who submits almost all the stories from Rob's blog to Slashdot. You can tell it's true because no one else thought of that lame joke :-) The "Rob Isn't Weird" thing comes from a conversation I had with Rob over his blog about his last name and how I remember to spell the URL for the site: weird without a D. He said it's how he remembers to spell weird.

    Anyhow, as the others have pointed out, ODF is already an ISO standard, Microsoft is the one playing catch-up here because they don't want to lose their monopoly control over the format. It's also true that the ISO process has been highly irregular. Haven't you noticed all the votes failing because the countries who joined to support Microsoft don't care about anything but OOXML? They're not even voting to abstain.

    Sure, there's FUD here, but it's on the other side. I'm not doing anything but spreading the word about what's going on. You can agree or disagree all you like, but FUD means "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" and I don't think I'm spreading any of those. Or are you afraid of the 662 responses? Does pointing to somewhere you can download and read them all make you more uncertain? As for doubt, doesn't letting you read them remove it?

    Oh, right. This is Slashdot. We complain that we're being ignored unfairly, then don't pony up any actual facts to support our position. It's the other guys fault!

    I'm just supposed to dismiss you with a handwave instead of, you know, giving you links to more information than you'll ever bother to look at, all of which are in TFA.

    Bah! Go away, troll!
    *handwave*

  50. Because it's not open by tepples · · Score: 1

    Now that ODF has failed

    Define failed, and give citations that OASIS' ODF has failed in the way you describe

    why so much hostility toward an open standard?

    OOXML is not as open as the title implies if a lot of elements amount to the following: "If this element is present, an implementation shall emulate the behavior of x brand software. This behavior is not described in this standard." In each case, the software in question is copyrighted with all rights reserved, its source code is a trade secret, and it is long out of print.

    Besides, an open standard is not enough. It must also be a Free standard, which can be implemented without payment of royalties in free software. ODF is a Free standard (see OOo 2.x).

    1. Re:Because it's not open by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Define failed, and give citations that OASIS' ODF has failed in the way you describe It has failed. Actually both ODF and OOXML are currently failures. I see no major shift in a significant percentage of corporates moving to these new formats.

      OOXML is not as open as the title implies if a lot of elements amount to the following: "If this element is present, an implementation shall emulate the behavior of x brand software. This behavior is not described in this standard." In each case, the software in question is copyrighted with all rights reserved, its source code is a trade secret, and it is long out of print.

      Besides, an open standard is not enough. It must also be a Free standard, which can be implemented without payment of royalties in free software. ODF is a Free standard (see OOo 2.x). Microsoft office formats *are* royalty free. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/840817/en-us

      Even if ODF wins the format war, I dont see a change in the software being used as currently Open Office *can* handle office document formats but there has been a limited interest to shift in that direction.

  51. For one thing, BitTorrent is an extra install by tepples · · Score: 1

    In this case, the document to be served is both unchanging and hobbled by bandwidth issues. But how can I persuade a prospective audience to install a client designed for retrieving an unchanging collection of unchanging documents if it does not also retrieve changing documents? We already get Slashdot users who complain in comments to an article because they can't download something on the break room computer at work.

    Bittorrent has a configurable block size Must block sizes be constant throughout a single torrent, and must they be a power of two octets in size?

    and is very efficient at distributing small files Even if so, how long does it take to get one or a dozen files, and how many people will be able to browse a BitTorrent collection? Assume the following:
    1. A collection of documents is published as a torrent of a folder.
    2. Each file in the folder is between 5 and 50 KiB in size, and the sizes are not multiples of a large power of two.
    3. Most users will request fewer than 10 percent of the documents.
    4. The median last mile to each user is 1 Mbps down, 250 Kbps up.
    5. I can persuade every reader of the collection of documents to download and install a BitTorrent client designed for reading small documents, such as an HTTP-to-torrent proxy analogous to the proxy that Freenet uses.
    So what kind of latency should people expect between requesting a file and having it? And how can I gain a wide audience if I insist on assumption 5?
  52. I'm sorry too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Submitter here. I read about you on Rob's blog. Then I saw the "how you can help" page that asked for publicity. Well, actually, I think it said you wanted a *little* publicity. But hopefully this will work out somehow :-)

    P.S. You should thank your ISP. From the other post up there, it looks like they were very helpful. Wish I knew who they were, because if I ever set up a website, I know I'd want a good host like them :)

  53. At least the donkey is happy. by coolGuyZak · · Score: 1

    Completely OT, I know. (look at the post title).

  54. Interesting quote from France by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    page 256, line 4

    This sentence makes no sense in English.
  55. Paid anonymous posters by rpp3po · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are very many anonymous posts today, which all share a common style. Absolutely lacking any arguments, maybe to not attract further discussion, but clearly intended to make the whole issue around OOXML appear as a solely political one. Posts discrediting the slashdot crowd, post discrediting critics as IBM puppets. OOXML IS a seriously flawed standard. There were endless very level headed comments on slashdot listing serious issues (e.g. the recently talked about "ANSI" and "Mac codepage" references), where you really ask yourself, how could a person knowing to be writing a "standard" put such rubbish in there?

    1. Re:Paid anonymous posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont know.

      Miguel from Gnome loves OOXML and thinks its supperior to the opendocument formant.

    2. Re:Paid anonymous posters by rpp3po · · Score: 1

      Just continue trying to let this look like a political issue.

      It's not the debate which is political, but this standard. It even includes bugs from previous Microsoft Office versions to make OOXML backwards compatible to their own product line. Any external developer, who just wants to use an interopable office file format, is burdened by having to implement this proprietary legacy crap.

      Microsoft has created its own office format mess during the last two decades. Create a lean and nice OOXML spec instead and let Microsoft do their homework by writing usable converters for their own legacy products. What's happening right now is Microsoft putting its legacy crap (Windows ties, bugs, ...) into this "open" spec and all other developers having to worry about Microsoft's DOC-mess for completely new applications, which shouldn't need to care.

  56. said customer is very happy to be running on a VM by dominux · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is very good value for money, the bandwidth and latency is very low, performance is excellent. No way could I afford that level of bandwidth and processor and rack space as a dedicated box. The initial slashdot shock caused the VM to run out of memory (it is doing a lot of stuff in just 128MB) and I was struggling to fix it. One email to support and 10 minutes later they have boosted the memory, restarted the box, sent me a reply and posted that they had fixed it on Slashdot! I would unhesitatingly recommend hosting stuff in a VM from Bytemark.

  57. What is FUD? by MickDownUnder · · Score: 1

    ODF defines a standard which makes no allowances for backwards compatibility with past file formats as opposed to MS's OpenXML format which does.

    All of the criticism levelled at OpenXML is about the difficulty to implement the backwards compatibility constructs of the format. There's nothing MS can do about this complexity, as the complexity is already out there in form of the MS Office documents sitting round in corporate filing systems dating back to the 90's.

    In reality its actually very easy to implement the constructs required to create new OpenXML format documents, and just as easy to implement a reader for such documents. So this criticism is coming from interests such as those in IBM that would like to everyone to give up on all the content they have created using MS formats.

    In reality, this is not an option, should OpenXML just become another ODF then the corporate world would probably just choose none of the above and wait for another solution to come along that does satisfy their needs.