Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Releases Specs for Binary Formats
skolima writes "In response to requests for even easier access to the Binary Formats, Microsoft has agreed to remove any intermediate steps necessary to get the documentation. They're going to just post it, making it directly available as a download on the Microsoft web site. Microsoft will also make the Binary Formats subject to its Open Specification Promise by February 15, 2008. They're even planning to include an Open Source converter implementation."
I hope these intermediate steps that they're eliminating include packaging the documents in an .exe file, and requiring MS Office to be installed. I'm looking at you, Word format!
--Rob
Towards the Singularity.
This has to be good. Right ? How will this work with specifications that say "render text like Word 98?" Will Microsoft now document how Word 98 renders ?
Oh wait, there is nothing to bash.... Well, let's invent, for christ sake, this is Slashdot. We sure can do better... Let's say... "Oh yeah, but they are convicted monopolists. Oh, and they replied to a bug 10 years later. Oh, and they suck.".
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
thats the carrot then. so where's the stick?
Because it ensures that the very real possibility of bitrot for the majority of documents written in the last 15 years is now greatly reduced.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Wait, what? Brain not comprehending this. Unless TFA is a complete pack of lies, I'm going to have to give tentative applause. Perhaps the only interesting thing I can think of is that "royalty free" != "we won't sue you into oblivion if we think you're trespassing on our patents". Sorry MS, you taught me to be cynical.
Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
Disclaimer:IANAL
The docs are released under MS' own "Open Specification Promise" *cringes*
http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/default.mspx
If you do a search on GPL you get:
Q: Is this Promise consistent with open source licensing, namely the GPL? And can anyone implement the specification(s) without any concerns about Microsoft patents?
A: The Open Specification Promise is a simple and clear way to assure that the broadest audience of developers and customers working with commercial or open source software can implement the covered specification(s). We leave it to those implementing these technologies to understand the legal environments in which they operate. This includes people operating in a GPL environment. Because the General Public License (GPL) is not universally interpreted the same way by everyone, we can't give anyone a legal opinion about how our language relates to the GPL or other OSS licenses, but based on feedback from the open source community we believe that a broad audience of developers can implement the specification(s).
I don't get warm and fuzzy feelings reading this and I think that's the idea...
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
or there's no way they'd be doing this. Well, it is Microsoft so there are likely to be some problems. For instance, they could post 10,000 lines of assembly or just plain crappy C code and say, 'there you go, it's open'. Not so bad in itself but not very easy to use none the less.
But what is really probably happening here is that ODF is getting adopted around the world by governments and once you go ODF, it's going to be a tough sell back to the pull-the-rug-out-from-under-your-feet Microsoft way. Anyways, if Microsoft really sees ODF as a credible threat, getting MS Office OXML through ISO is important, very important. But, once they can do that and gain back credibility, there is NOTHING to stop them from releasing software which others are not privy too. ie, change the format and keep everyone else chasing them.
Remember, ISO will not be in control of the changes to the spec, Microsoft will be.
So watch out for this good-guy mask being applied. We've seen nothing to say there isn't anything but the same old Microsoft hiding behind it. And no, I would not accept this as a first step and something to trust. ODF and open access to your own created data is too important to let a simple trick undermine it all. IMO.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
This isn't the first project that Microsoft has released on Sourceforge. They also released WiX, which is a program to build windows installation executables (similar to Nullsoft's nsis). Sourceforge is available to everybody who wants to publish an open source project, even mega-corps like Microsoft. I wouldn't suggest it any other way.
Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
But why the hoops. The Microsoft site says
you may be eligible to participate in a Royalty-Free File Format Program and to receive technical documentation for certain Microsoft Office binary file formats.
Er, why not just put um on a website.
Be open or not.
They must be worried sick about the ISO meeting in February, scheduled for a week after this grand opening. It's make or break time for MS-OOXML.
Up to now, the binary formats were specifically excluded from open source developers. Will that change?
The new format is one of the MS Office Open XML( MS-OOXML ) formats. And my guess is that this current revelation has been in the plans for some time. After all, patching Microsoft Office and disabling the OPENING of the older file formats is the perfect example of why people need an open file format. People are being shut out from using their older formats. But, out comes Microsoft saying that they'll open up those older formats and release converter code so everyone can convert to MS-OOXML. Yup, sure looks like the has been planned for quite some time.
But then there is probably a document or two inside Microsoft which shows the many paths to limit and/or destroy ODF support and to gain back any lost market due to MS-OOXML spec acceptance. For over 20 years Microsofts business model has been to beat the competition by attacking their revenue stream(s) by leveraging the 100's of millions of systems sold annually with pre-loaded Windows. Seldom has it ever used superior product attributes to win the market. I see no reason to think some switch has magically been thrown and now Microsoft wants to compete for customers in an open and level playing field. I don't think they would even know how to do this because without a complete management replacement, it's in their blood to go after the business and not the customers. Destroy the business and the customers will go to the shinny light that is Microsoft. IMO.
Regarding those new formats, there is a nice 6,000 page document that tells you how simple the new formats are so it should be very easy to implement an application which can read and display everything the spec covers. Why would you ever need code from Microsoft to help you access files based on that spec? If they can do it, anybody can. FYI, so far, there is one vendor who has applications with high levels of support of the spec and that is Microsoft.
Just look at how many apps now have a high level of support for the ODF spec:
http://opendocumentfellowship.com/applications
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
"This has to be good. Right ?
/windows/system/explorer.dll /windows/system/kernel.dll
How will this work with specifications that say "render text like Word 98?" Will Microsoft now document how Word 98 renders ?"
I'm sure there'll be some nice documents to tell you exactly how each of these statements work. You know, things like:
1)open file
2)scan for 0x06660666
3)take the next 128 bytes and pass them to winRulesAll(*DWORD) in
4)take the resulting array of 8bit vectors and sequentially call winConvertToBlob[0-255](LoByte(DWORD)) in
5)concatenate the results from those calls and send to sysDecryptWord95Text(URL,*DWORD) in mplayer.dll with URL=http://microsoft.com/secretdoor.asp
6)replace those 128 bytes with the results from the call or, if failed, render text like Word 95.
Easy as pie.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Re Feb 14: Most geeks have no clue what you are talking about...
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
What the hell is all this crap about "open and level playing field"?!? Are you kidding me?
Look, we can idealize society all we want, but putting on blinders and not seeing reality is just foolish.
If you come up in a fight against Tito Ortiz, you sure as hell want a baseball bat. You might call that leveling the playing field, but that's only the case because Tito has an advantage in the first place. *HE* doesn't want to give up his strength, size and experience to your baseball bat just because you want a fair fight. Only the guy with the up-hill battle wants the fair fight!
The underdogs always cry foul and always want someone, some government agency, some legal entity, to come to their aid and "level the playing field". Hogwash I say. The guy that has the advantage, at some point, did something right (right in the sense that it got them an advantage) that the underdog didn't do. They deserve their status as favorite because they worked for it.
The underdog can still get an advantage any time they want, with the right effort. Microsoft doesn't hold the equivalent of a doomsday bomb. They CAN be beat. Yes, it's harder now. They've made it EXTREMELY difficult to compete against them, and certainly they've done so at times in ways that are morally objectionable. I wish the world was such where we could count on everyone to act reasonably and morally, in which case wanting a level playing field might be reasonable, but that's not the reality.
Besides, when has the human race as a whole ever shied away from a challenge because it was "too hard"? We've been to the moon for crying out loud! Are you telling me someone can't figure out a way, level playing field or not, to beat Microsoft? Hey, *I* don't know how to do it, but there's plenty of people smarter than me that have got to be able to figure it out.
So let's stop whining all the damned time, let's stop idealizing things and bitching about how there should be a level, fair playing field. NO THERE SHOULD NOT. Those that out-work the rest should have the advantages they've earned, and those that haven't achieved that should just tighten their belts and man the fuck up and get it done, overcome the odds (which they made longer by being out-hustled in the first place).
If you're David, you're not going to beat Goliath by bitching and moaning about your pitiful slingshot and how someone should "make it fair" and give you a bazooka, you need to figure out how to build an F-16 yourself and get things done. All the complaining in the world isn't going to make that happen.
It seems clear to me that Microsoft is not bound to use MSOOXML as the defailt format for any of their software. They can continue to evolve and evolve starting with Office 2009.
They just need to be able to Open and Save As whatever finally gets through ISO.
Then they aren't forced into ODF, and they can still use a proprietary format by default--and they can still claim to follow an open standard. Most people won't understand why they need to save as "ISO DIS 29500 something something" and will just keep chugging along using the default Office formats.
ISO DIS 29500 will become the next RTF. Sure you _could_ use it, but very few do.