Slashdot Mirror
ISO Approves OOXML
sTeF writes in, with the hope that this is an April Fools joke. Doesn't look like it though. An article up at Intellectual Property Watch claims they have obtained a document (PDF) enumerating the vote after Microsoft's OOXML won ISO standard status.
I think we all expected MSFT's chicanery to work in the short-term.
But witness that recent brand-awareness survey- As understanding of the computer world seeps into mainstream conciousness, MSFT's rotten practices are coming back to haunt them.
Let's hope that the mainstream media picks up on the insanely obvious corruption involved here, and the Streisand Effect kicks in.
I don't think this is the best outcome for open/free standards, but it should still be viewed as a win, long-term.
"Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
was to retroactively standardize 20 years of legacy document formats. All MS-OOXML really is is a forwards-compatible XML serialization of the Microsoft Office 2003 formats.
And yes, many at Microsoft do consider the whole standardization process to be a sham. (I know, because I work there.)
Its the Pyhrric victory to end all.
(1) if they lost the ISO process then they lost
(2) they won the ISO process then they lost as it forced a deep examination of the standard, and raised critical questions and caused them more problems then it solved.
(3) if nobody else implements this flawed standard then they lose as some Goverments are now also specifying cross platform implementation as well as open standard (perhaps in response to this mess)
(4) if (and this is real unlikely) there are other implementations of this standard (eg OO) then they lose as MS Office is no longer required to be ubiquitous on the desktop
This is NOT really a win for MS the way that I see it. They can spin this how they want and surely get away with it for a large amount of the population - but big business and govermental contracts (where the real money is) are already looking for an escape from propietry formats and have been for a while.
I'm really fucked off about the perversion of the ISO system, the bad practice, the lack of any "technology morals" in decisions that needed to be unbiased. But I am not that upset about OOXML being passed - I really do not think MS has won this one.
The important thing to watch now is how MS spins this and where the important money goes (big contracts, goverment).
You are right about the size of the market but wrong about how much money it will make you and what tools to use. Sun and IBM will give you PDF of ODF output and a handy database system to keep it all. So can anyone else with Open Office. Some people are going to be automating the process better than others but it's going to be a competitive market. That's the whole point of standards, to avoid the massive cost of reinventing what should be obvious and spend resources on things people actually want. MSXML is going nowhere in a market like that.
No calls now, I'm
...find it ironic that the document describing OOXML's ISO adoption is in PDF format?
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Yikes. I like Office 2007 but it is a pain in the ass to teach people to use. Banners? Really? No File Menu? WTF MATE!!! Believe me, Open Office is going to get my vote when it comes time to upgrade here.
I think the best approach to this is to:
(a) Require MS to be true to their own standard (or immediately fall foul of anti-monopoly rules - hello EU)
(b) Ensure every procurement decision in favour of MS because of this to REQUIRE to implement MSOOXML as well. No point using it for criteria otherwise.
That way I give it a month before reality hits. And less than that for the EU to collar the b*stards again, and this time it won't be a baby fine because that has proven not to have too much of an effect. A cute punishment would be making ODF compliance mandatory in the EU. Given that they haven't implemented a proper filter this may completely nuke the franchise. And without the Office franchise there isn't much left of MS because brute forcing people into an upgrade to something as bad as Vista hasn't exactly worked out too well. Couple that with sub prime problems and companies as well as end users may start to seek for more economic ways to spend their money.
This story is FAR from over.
Insert
ISO takes pride in seeking consensus. To compare sentiment does anyone have an overview of voting results for other standards? How many opposed ODF when it was approved? How does it compare to other standards within the same area or votes for ISO-standards in general?
Of all (or most) of the reasons for not liking the MS OOXL file, I oppose it the most because what if 5 or 10 years down the road with a new Office version, they decide to change the format. With this supposed "standard" we might all have to convert our documents. Locking your work in this format is also bad news if you want to retrieve it later. At least the folks at Wordperfect were kind enough to not have changed the format since the 5.x release.
I've decided to use LaTeX to make a final copy of my documents in PDF format after writing up the document w/o markup in Text or RTF document. I'm new to using it, but the markup for most of my purposes is as easy as HTML (I don't use tables or math very much). Its too bad others don't know how easy it is (esp. with templates you can download).
Some of my files are 10 years old and I've archived them all pretty well. But if I use a current version of Word to open it up, the formatting is all screwy. All the more reason to change.
Doesn't the old cliche of "the great thing about standards is there are so many to choose from" apply here? Or does this mean a ton of people will now be forced to use it and Microsoft will reap the benefits?
Sorry, but every article I read about OOXML is about the voting and standardization irregularities, and nothing I've found reviews OOXML from the users standpoint, or implications of it being ISO-ed...
The fools are those at ISO who voted to approve this horrid "standard". It definitely wasn't good enough to be fast-tracked, let alone made into a standard.
Should be interesting to see the next moves from IBM and Sun though. Could there be some sort of challenge or appeal coming? I don't think we've seen the end of this.
Lets wait for the announcement tomorrow, ISO is deliberately avoiding an Aprils Fool announcement, which could mean that it might be of a more serious nature.
Of course if the serious nature of the announcement is approving OOXML, I'll be sending them some emails telling them what a disgrace the process has been.
It might not change anything, but I encourage anyone with the ability to send email to do something similar.
Blah blah sig blah blah blah irony blah blah
See the story:
An article up at Intellectual Property Watch claims they have obtained a document (PDF)
See the article linked is "PDF"? Why? It is supported on everything down to Symbian S60 handsets and any open source software can support it. People can even race with vendors "reader" software making better ones. That is a real standard which won its place without dirty tricks.
I bet usual suspects like Novell and their mighty Mono/Silverlight innovator Icaza will come up with a thing that supports it to some extent, advertise it and MS will use it as a proof.
Last question: Did gnome people openly critised this decision? On their website?
April 1 could be the end of ISO. Once you lose credibility, you don't get it back. It is not a April 1 joke either. You can even feel that one of the biggest IT scandals is waiting and this time it is not poor open source geeks anymore, it is IBM/Sun and GNU/BSD and various World governments especially those very rich ones who can even say "no" to EU. Don't forget the militaries either.
The ISO standard, besides showing how corrupting Microsoft's monopoly money is, changes nothing.
We have the same situation today as we did yesterday.
(1) A "standard" which is only a standard because a monopoly uses it.
(2) A "standard" which is independently implemented by (n>1) vendors.
So, as long as *we* the technologically literate stay "on message" like the P.R. spinmasters, we can use this in our favor.
The "April fools document standard" AFDS for short, should be as well known as the "halloween documents." And when they ask why it is called the "april fools document standard," tell them.
how is babby formed?
I'm afraid that this hardly will hurt ISO too much. They have some of the most important and widely used certification standards like ISO1400 (environmental management ) and ISO900 (quality management systems). Sorry, but they will be up and running for a long time.
Which in itself is an announcement. If they rejected OOXML, would anybody think it was a joke? No. If they rubber-stamped OOXML, would anybody think it was a joke? Yes. So, by admitting there is a danger of it being construed as a joke, what is ISO telling everybody?
It's either that, or they aren't bothered about the joke aspect and are just using it as an excuse to stall while they figure stuff out.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
Were they fixed? Really? Like the other 98% of the comments, that were "fixed" even nobody reading the "fix" due to lack of time?
Did you know that they had to vote NO if any one of their issues weren't fixed? "Nearly every one" doesn't cut it. Also, they could vote NO even if all of their issues were solved just because they discovered a new one, or because they think some other problem that wasn't fixed is important.
Now, how did the Czech Republic know that their issues were fixed if nobody readed the final document before voting?
Rethinking email
The plugin is a horrible monster.
I hope the EU forces, under pains of billion dollar fines, Microsoft to put ODF support directly into future versions of Office, and continues to threaten them if they try to break it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.