Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Office 2007 to Support ODF - But Not OOXML
Andy Updegrove writes "About two hours ago, Microsoft announced that it will update Office 2007 to natively support ODF 1.1, but not to implement its own OOXML format. Not until Office 14 is released (no date given so far for that) will anyone be able to buy an OOXML ISO-compliant version. Why will Microsoft do this after so many years of refusal? Perhaps because the only way it can deliver a product to government customers that meets an ISO/IEC document format standard is by finally taking the plunge, and supporting 'that other format.' Still, many questions remain, such as when this upgrade will actually be released, how good a job it will do, and whether the API Microsoft has said it will make available to permit developers to supply 'save to ODF' default plugins will be supported by a patent non-assertion promise allowing implementations under the GPL (the upgrade supplied by Microsoft will not allow ODF as the default setting)."
They have yielded this little bit because they have to but it is too little too late.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Chances of it having several Microsoft-specific "add-ons" that are patent-encumbered and not supported by the actual ODF spec: Approaching 100%.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
No need to look for further motivations...
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
Not even they are going to implement it until the next full office release. You have to admit, that says a lot about the standard.
Honestly, the first thing I thought when I saw this article was that it had to be some kind of April Fools article come late.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
So, in case anyone was still thinking that OOXML being confirmed as a standard wasn't a bad thing...
And as far as supporting ODF goes, I'd applaud Microsoft for taking a step in the right direction if they weren't constantly declaring themselves the victors over Open Source. I only wonder how they'll spin this.
You can say all negative things you will about it, but this is a great victory for ODF.
-- Cheers!
- Will ODF spreadsheets be functionally equivalent to CSV?
- Will ODF text be functionally equivalent to plain-text ASCII with line breaks?
- WIll ODF presentations be JPEG renderings?
- Will ODF import and export take hours?
- etc.
I've occasionally been accused of having an evil mind, but I'm sure that professionals given weeks or months can come up with better kneecapping plans than the above amateur hipshots.Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
well - only if microsoft is able to buy their way through the standards process will anyone be able to buy an OOXML ISO-compliant version.
UKUUG is currently waiting on the UK judicial system to decide whether to do a judicial review of the British Standards Institute's recent decision to ratify OOXML.
clonking "comments" together in blocks of 100 for vote "yes no", towards the end of the (only) 5 day process, smells a bit fishy. especially as the comments weren't actually reviewed as having been actioned / corrected (in the 6,000 page document).
the BSI came up with something ridiculous like 900 comments on the 6,000 page document.
it's all incredibly fishy - long story. far too much to fit into one silly slashdot comment, so i'll stop.
So I guess speaking Hungarian and throwing eggs at Steve Ballmer actually did pay off.
It's all fun & games until someone loses the game.
A: No, because companies are already so deep with old .xls files and macros built for said files that they will still be unwilling to transition from Microsoft Office to StarOffice.
That, and StarOffice just doesn't feel polished compared to MSOffice.
I seriously think that the macros built around companies' documents & spreadsheets are what's keeping them locked in to MSOffice, not the file format, per se
And for all you OO.o fans out there, don't even bother getting started; StarOffice is essentially OO.o, but with better support for MSOffice formatted documents, plus it has better tools like its thesaurus. OO.o may be nice for you, but there's a reason why Sun can sell StarOffice, and it's not because Sun's evil, and it's not *just* about tech support.
It may be that Microsoft is serious about supporting ODF, but I would not be surprised if it is somehow "crippled" or poorly implemented within the word processor and spreadsheet. Somehow I don't feel that you will be able to open an .odf made in Word with OpenOffice and there will be no "artifacts" or some loss of formatting, and vice versa of course. There are already issues with odf's opening across operating systems (usually a font issue causing discrepancy in formatting), and I am sure that Microsoft will use this opportunity to "make its case" for the "superiority" of its native format, whatever that format may be.
If this will not be, it will be a most astute business move. Making their office suite cost less would be even better.
For every present, there is a past
Err what? You mean the format they added support for in December 2006? The open source plugin they sponsored, paid for and chucked developers at it? That format?
Jeeeze you people are harsh!
I think that Microsoft could announce tomorrow that they are giving out free blow jobs to anyone who uses Linux. As soon as the first blowjob was given out, someone would find something negative about it.
Embrace (where we are now)
Extend (aka 'break')
Extinguish (where we'll end up)
Nuff said
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Andy
I wonder if they licensed the source for Sun's ODF plugin for word? That might explain why it's happening before OOXML.
This is happening because the negative attention they've gotten recently. Office 2007 has gotten a bad review thanks to a over-thought user interface, so they hired an Adobe UI guru to correct that. OOXML hasn't gotten any acceptance from the community so introducing it now will just further the negativity. I'm sure this move toward ODF is to bring more approval as they scrap Office 2007 and bring something better in version 14. By then they'll try to put some positive spin on OOXML as they release a better interface and incorporate OOXML.
They have admitted they need ODF and that will kill OOXML, Office and them. That's because everyone knows OOXML is not ready and will never be good enough. The usual trick of making ODF difficult will not work because people can simply download Open Office. People might do that anyway because Office is not worth the money [look a twitter reference]. If they don't really become an honest company, and they won't, things will get worse. Despite drastic measures they already have a hard time moving their new software. When they lose the document franchise, they lose the OS monopoly. The curtian is falling fast on their heads.
Not even they are going to implement it until the next full office release.
Not even the next Office will support it. Office 2007 is version 12. If the article is correct (they said Office 14), that's two releases away!
How long does that "patent non-assertion" protection racket last? More to the point, WHAT patents have been violated?
What will the license be like? Let's ignore for a moment the argument about the enforceability of eula's.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
The summary is a bit misleading. Current Office 2007 documents fail to validate as transitional OOXML because of some very minor differences. For example, the final standard changed an attribute value from "yes/no" to "true/false".
All major ODF implementations, including OpenOffice, fail to validate against ISO ODF 1.0 for similar reasons.
Thus, to make some big deal of Microsoft not immediately slipstreaming in an update to Office to 100% conform to OOXML, while ignoring the fact that OpenOffice still doesn't fully conform to ODF so long after ODF 1.0 was ratified is a bit hypocritical.
I know that the common perception on slashdot is that ODF is the only format we need because of its OO heritage. That is frankly a naïve position. The format was backed by IBM, Oracle and Sun for a reason. Right now MS' selling point for Office is features. Some would call it bloated - but MS Office still has more features than OO. That may not be that important to the vast majority of users, but it is a selling point nontheless.
Imagine a situation where MS could not leverage the feature advantage, because the standard persistence format could not represent the advanced feature set. Ink comes to mind; it's actually part of OXML but there's not anything like it in ODF. Representatives for Microsofts competitors could fight any extension (invoking the "err on side of caution" argument) of the format until OO/StarOffice was prepared to implement the feature as well. But that would actually stiffle innovation and hurt the customers who could actually realize a productivity gain from new features.
By creating a situation where we have two formats and already a situation where one is larger and with more features specified, Microsoft has got a situation where they can let the "conservatives" drive (or not) ODF, and Microsoft can be the primary driver of OXML, although they can now only make suggestions and requests. In short they have a situation where they stand a better chance at exposing the hidden agendas of their competitors representatives should they ever try to hold back Microsoft innovation in Office for compettitive reasons.
I don't believe for a second that the motives of IBM, Oracle and Sun were always free of hidden agendas. Of course they saw their involvement (and influence through merits) in ODF as a way to gain some control over the future of MS Office. Office has always been one of MS' best cash cows.
You can argue that we don't need any more innovation in the office productivity area. But that would be an opinion and not something you should base a standard upon.
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
OXML was put on the fast track for being accepted as an international standard. The fast track is intended only to be used for protocols that are already a de facto standard. Microsoft are now admitting that they do not support it themselves, and certainly no one else does. Logically, it should therefore be withdrawn as a standard and, possibly, be resubmitted through the normal route.
Sorry, but most people actually couldn't give a crap about standards. Most people just want a functional suite of office applications that works more or less the way they've come to expect such programs. Most people aren't even aware that there is such a thing as a file format, or that there are different types of them.
Most people also want to be able to easily exchange documents with other people. That's part of the reason why Office is so well entrenched. Sure, you can download a copy of OO to open an ODF file, but if you're running a business, you don't want to make your clients do that, because it's a hassle. Nearly everyone has Office, and practically nobody has OO (this is in rough marketshare percentages).
Don't get me wrong. I would rather have a clear, open standard with a decent existing implementation that's not tied to the whims of a vendor. But I and people like me really are a very small part of the market.
Office is Microsoft's biggest-selling product by revenue, even more than Windows. Since governments are mandating open formats, Microsoft has no choice but to implement ODF if they want to keep selling those lucrative enterprise agreements. Getting OOXML approved as a standard format was a huge win for them to be sure, but governments could (and will) just as easily standardize on ODF, especially given all the problems with OOXML. Microsoft used to rely on file format lock-in as a sales tool, but it seems now compatibility and (gasp) quality are Microsoft's selling points for Office. They're doing what it takes to maintain those huge sales.
If it's not one thing it's your mother.
After all that crap about OOXML is open when it is not, all that railroading of the ISO and they are going to support ODF anyway? I am packing my bags. Jesus is coming soon!
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx
Also, ODF will be allowed to be configured as the default format for documents.
SP2 will also include support for PDF and XPS export.
throw new SuccessException("Sig read successfully");
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It seems like that all of the really-close-but-not-quite naming schemes meant to cause confusion have finally confused even Microsoft's *marketing* people.
I have a feeling this will get turned on its head: "oh, we really meant OOXML, sorry!"
MS Office is by far the most widespread office application package. We're talking 90% of marketshare in both Windows and Mac worlds. So what does this allow Microsoft?
- Implement ODF support but so that many ODF documents created by look like crap in MS Office. Typical user: " is crap."
- ODF documents created by MS Office look like crap when read by , or even make crash. Typical user: " is crap."
- Govt. and other institutions that mandate the use of standards-supporting office applications are satisfied that their most-often used software, MS Office, satisfies the requirement. In the meantime, MS works hard to release their OOXML-supporting Office.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
At the other end of the spectrum, you can use LaTex and various front ends and again have total control over appearance across platforms, but without the user having to worry about the details. Word processing is in between and compromises on both layout and content orientation.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
(or of course like Orcs in Warcraft III we really really have misunderstood them ...).
Andy
It doesn't make sense when you say it as twitter, and it doesn't make sense when you say it as Erris, gnutoo, Mactrope, inTheLoo, westbake, willeyhill or Odder or any other of your personalities.
Also, talk about not caring if someone figures out that you're the same person, all your links are pasted from twiter's lame journal of the past few days. I mean, as if Robert Scoble (who I'm sure had lots of credibility for you when he worked for Microsoft) posting a one-liner to twitter (irony) saying he's not going to drop $400 on Office means anything at all.
wrong forum
I love the smell of schadenfreude in the morning.
okay, there are still a number of ifs here, but it looks like as of the release of sp2 for office microsoft is officially dead.
my question is, how did sun, ibm and google manage to put the pressure on adobe? It looks to me like offering native pdf support for office was the carrot for microsoft here.
They threw a lot of money at Vista too and look how that turned out: Years late, missing important promised features, PITA for users. In fact, I suspect that one reason OOXML support is late is because staff got pulled off of Office to work on Vista.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You don't make sense now either, twitter.
Has it become a crime to reply to twitter or point out he's using multiple accounts and manipulating the moderations system?
...templates for Word, Excel etc, and use those instead of the default formats. Standardization is a war Microsoft can't win, not any more.
Beauty is in the beholder of the eye.
in my eyes this is excellent news. i get the interface of ms office (sorry guys it's miles ahead of OOo) with the open standards of open office. what's to complain about?
First, MS says they will not support ODF, and everyone here gave them flack for it.
Now, MS says they will support ODF, and everyone (ok, most people) here are still given them flack for it.
So I just want to say Kudos to MS for making a good decision.
We know, as every real Microsoft employee secretly knows in their heart of hearts, that it's all over... Nordlicht has failed, the winter's setting in, and Ballmer's down there in his bunker with a roomful of expensive matchwood. Still clutching a splintered fragment of a tasteful sofa in his hand (although it would be impolite to mention the shreds of fabric hanging from his mouth), his eyes dart wildly from a shredded "The WOW starts Now!" poster, to a voodoo doll of RMS, to a dartboard with Michael Dell's picture pinned to it. Outside, the loyal generals are choosing lots about who wants to go in and tell him the latest disastrous news from the Western front...
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
First OOXML is not approved by the ISO yet. So by Office 14, the ISO will approve of a final format and OOXML support can be added to Office 14 and I am sure Microsoft will release retropatches for older Office versions to support it as well. Most likely going back as far as Office 2000 or Office 97.
Microsoft knows that OpenOffice.Org, Star Office, IBM Lotus Symphony, and other office suites already support ODF, and Microsoft does not want Office 2007 to be the pink elephant that does not support ODF, and Office 2007 users couldn't open up ODF format documents from friends and coworkers, and would flock to Office 2007 alternatives to open them up. Microsoft knows that would cut into Office 2007 sales as most ODF office suites are free to download and use.
Microsoft also knows that many governments have already decided to support ODF format documents, and if Office 2007 doesn't get ODF support, sales will go to Microsoft's competitors.
There have been massive online campaigns for ODF and against OOXML, this is Microsoft's way of silencing critics of Office 2007 that it does not support a true open standard.
Microsoft knows that MS-Word and PDF documents have already started to be replaced with ODF documents. Also the old RTF format no longer meets the needs of Internet documents anymore and MS-Word format is just a modified RTF format. Just as Adobe lost control of who uses the PDF standard, Microsoft knows that they can get control of the ODF format from Sun/IBM etc as well.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Well, i am surprised to see Microsoft supporting ODF in their office suite, and before Apple too...
Will they support it on the Mac version of office too?
It's also good to see Microsoft contributing towards the ISO/OASIS process for future versions of ODF, and if they have any genuinely worthwhile enhancements i hope they will be incorporated.
Now the questions are...
How good will the support be?
Will they deviate from the spec and introduce proprietary extensions?
Will it let you set the default save format to ODF, on a single system and on a network via group policies?
Did the EU put pressure on them to support ODF?
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Not a crime to reply; just reply-on topic and without accusations that are irrelevant to the point under discussion. Seriously, it makes perfect sense to me that someone be karmically punished for obsessing over someone else's posting habits as opposed to discussing the topic at hand.
Aside from that, even if he /were/ gaming the moderation system, it seems that he's only succeeded in having multiple accounts with bad karma... not a terribly effective 'gaming', wouldn't you say?
Aw damn. This is the second post like this I've made -- now I'm doing it too! Crap! Bring on the karmic punishment!
Now if MS would just announce that all versions of Works could meet a Microsoft standard (of any type - especially other versions of Works), the European High Court would be doing cartwheels in the streets...
*** Don't be dull.***
Now, a game console with an open source platform would appeal to game developers nicely. Think about a full-featured Minix-driven system with a small graphical subsystem (kdrive for X, with about 10 megs of libraries and X server, with OpenGL support) and a set of libraries to supply a developer's API. Home-brew hackers would try to improve and expand this API, and that would get back to game developers. Useful things would be non-infectious GPL stuff, i.e. BSD or MIT or PD or LGPL.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
They finally realized that OOXML is in fact an abortion and not implementable even on a hypothetical level?
Well imagine that!
Perhaps they're frightened of Neelie Kroes. I'd be. Finally there's something that the EU is good for, i.e. standing up to fuck-huge money.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/84/Evillaugh.ogg
When I say this sounds like a good sign...
But almost every time stuff like this happens, Microsoft eventually ends up playing their old tricks.
It would be cool if they surprised us this time, but they have far too great a credibility dept for me to think anything particularly good will come from this move.
I stole this Sig
I haven't read through all the comments, so I apologize if this is a dupe. Even if they implement ODF 1.1 100% to spec, I'm sure it wont be the default option to save a document. From personal experience, people who aren't computer savvy don't check the options but just click save, pick a directory, and figure their stuff is saved. So even if they do implement a 100% to specification ODF, the frustration of "What format is the document? Is it ODF? It has to be ODF, go back and save it as ODF and send it!" will overwhelm the vast majority of users will get so frustrated they will just get office to avoid this hassle. Anyway, if they do actually implement ODF without any strings attached ("Hey, we have ODF, with OLE!") it will be good for everybody, since at least one companies tech people can send a smaller company who opts to use OpenOffice documents in ODF and have it look good. -Mike
Office 2008 for Mac exists now, and yes it doesn't have VBA. However, VBA will return to Office in the next release.
See http://www.macworld.com/article/133393/2008/05/vba.html?t=201 for details.
It's an interesting strategic move to bring VBA back despite it being a complete re-write from what I've heard. They must reeeeeeeally need it to stay competitive with OO and similar apps.
No, they are supporting ODF so they can provide an extended proprietary version of it that won't work with OpenOffice. Then they will turn that into a PR ploy to downplay the advantages of open standards, OpenOffice, etc.
MS is one of the most predictable companies on the planet. And people still fall for the same tricks, over and over and over. Lucy and Charlie Brown.
Overall the Office team tends not to drop crappy code on their customers. Its one of the biggest (the biggest?) money makers at the company so they don't want to do anything to hurt that. I'm not saying they didn't resist ODF, but once they say they will support it, it probably will be a reasonably functional implementation. When OOXML come out will that get an even higher level of polish and functionality? Wouldn't be surprised.
If you're going to troll with one-liners that create openings for your sockpuppets to karma whore, please answer the question, too late for what?
1. "They have admitted they need ODF..." Where? When? (citation needed) ...." Everyone? Maybe most of us here on /. will agree, (then again, maybe not!) but that hardly accounts for 'everyone'.
2. "...everyone knows OOXML is not ready
Come up out of your Mom's Basement and have a look at modern reality. 'Everyone' is just going about their 'own life' and could care less about OOMXL, ODF, and MS.
3. "If they don't really become an honest company,..." WTF?!?!?
Honest Company?...what is that?....like Disney? Sony? MS? Who....name one, I dare you!
All I can think when I read your post is, like something from Frank Zappa's 'Titties and Beer'....'I got me three beers and a fist-full of downs, I'm gonna get ripped, so fuck you clowns!'
Yes, I know that feeding trolls only keeps them coming back, but I could not help this one.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/office/bb265236.aspx
OOXML is already supported in the fullest implmentation available.
It is also extensible to support full specification (which was requested features outside of Microsoft).
So for the ODF before OOXML is not only wrong, but REALLY wrong.
It's okay, I too wonder what the hell people's problem with twitter actually is.
He has multiple accounts? So fucking what? His posts aren't that great? Again, so fucking what?
Is twitter some sort of child molester and I missed the memo, or is it really just that some number of ACs really have nothing better to do than search out all of his posts and whine about him because... um... just because?
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
twitter deserves frequent ridicule and criticism because he frequently does
things which are wrong. He is either too stupid to understand the social
harm he does or is too greedy to care and he should be called to task each
time he is caught saying or doing the wrong things. This is an impossible
task for any single person, of course, but it's easy for the community if we
cooperate and share what we know.
http://brlug.net/pipermail/general_brlug.net/2008-April/018422.html
http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/rss.xml
"And of course users can set ODF to be the default format if they wish, the same way they would for other Word, Excel or PowerPoint formats."
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
What if they implement ODF support really badly causing people to think ODF is bad and hence, Openoffice is bad. I know its BS, but what about Joe Average?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Maybe this would have something to do with the announcement of the Dutch Defense Department, that they went to use MS Office with the SUN ODF plugin ? And use ODF as their internal document standard ?
Just my 2 cts.
From FTA:
Moreover, it would also join both the OASIS working group as well as the ISO/IEC JTC1 working group that has control of the ISO/IEC version of ODF.
How long until they bribe the working group and we find that ODF includes specifications like "word wrap like office 95"?
O2K7 may be selling well, but you seem to have forgotten that the parent poster had bought O2K7 and only then realised (because who would expect it) the format isn't working in a heterogenous Windows network. How are you supposed to tell your customer that they have to upgrade to O2K7 just because they are on 2003?
So you can't tell until AFTER you bought it how it won't work in your situation. And you can't get your money back.
Sure, slashdot sucks but only because arseholes are modding up crap like yours (and so many christian bigots on the Jack Thompson story) because MS shills demand that they be right and hunt down any place they don't control to ensure The One True Word Is Heard Across The Land.
I used Ubuntu for 7 months with no Windows XP, ultimately it proved too difficult for me to continue using indefinitely so I went and bought myself a copy of Windows XP (just in time as well to get an OEM version). If I, a Computer Science student, prefer Windows to Linux, I don't think your average Joe stands much chance at being converted.
Ballmer seems a very uninspiring person, especially for the position of Microsoft CEO. I long for the days where Gates was the CEO...his geeky looks played well with the idea that Microsoft creates technology. Ballmer looks like a used cars salesman.
Then the first thing Ballmer will do is to throw him out.
When will you guys learn not to mention the word "chair" in a discussion involving Microsoft?
Disclaimer: I'm new here!
Why, precisely does it matter as whom he posts? Even if all these accounts are, as is apparently the consensus, belonging to twitter, shouldn't you be rebutting his POINTS instead of his name? You spend two and a half paragraphs attacking his accounts, and half of one line giving a statement that says, in essense "oh, yeah, and your argument doesn't make sense either." Sounds like an ad hominem to me.
If I were someone coming in without an opinion, I would see someone making a statement backed up by data, as much as you may contest its validity, followed immediately by an unprovoked attack on the person who made the statement.
Like I said, I'm new here. Care to tell me why, exactly, you choose to respond against the man instead of against his data?
Actually StarOffice and OpenOffice have always had better support for legacy formats, including those legacy formats from MS. Now both have VBA support as mentioned in other posts here. And now that MS has dropped support from its old formats, it's not a question of if businesses are going to drop MS Office, but only a matter of when... unless they get the fishook called SharePoint in their gullet. If you have old MS documents, rely on those old MS documents and you can't keep old versions of MS Office or extend the 'rental period', then you have to switch suites to one that can read the old formats.
A further advantage of StarOffice/ OpenOffice is that macros can be written in python or javascript. That means you can have your macro programmers with a comp sci background. And you can have them participate in web development and other projects. You are at the same time then less likely to hire MS boosters who will run their little MS anti-technology jihadz against you from inside your own office, work is so much easier without them around. You get programmers that can participate in more than one area.
So it kills two birds (or three) with one stone. Both javascript and python are used in web development and XML tools handle OpenOffice's main format, the OpenDocument Format, there is much less overhead in integrating document management and web apps and less need for disparate skill sets. Win-win situation.
Further, in addition to all of the above advantages, you then gain a position where you can change platforms or maintenance contract at will.
There's no reason not to drop MS Office any more.Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Not useful.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Delaying support for ISO 295000 until the next full Office release allows Microsoft to incorporate refinements made by the ISO committee in charge of maintaining that standard. If that committee gets in gear it could shave many rough edges off ISO 295000 before the reference implementation is finalized.
:wq
This isn't new. The plugin has been available from....
http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/
for quite some time...
Note the contributors...
http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/#contributors
Whilst Microsoft has funded this project, it was not directly developed by microsoft, it has been developed by independent developers, as it is open source, anyone can inspect the code, including you.
There has been so much disinformation about the whole OOXML/ODF its really been quite impressive.
This move could have unexpected results. I think MS Word will always be prominent, even with competition opened up a lot more. Open Office has improved a lot over the years, but they can't seem to let go of decisions that keep OO big/clunky/slow/etc - without tweaking. I use OO at home on my Ubuntu box because it is the best thing on Linux for dealing with MS Office documents. Soon, that will no longer be true with MS deciding to support ODF. OO users like me may start dropping OO for koffice, "gnome office" and other alternative office software they previously stayed away from because of the MS interoperability issue.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
I have to agree. I've been around Slashdot for a while, and I've seen some posts by twitter, and while he seems a little "off", lots of people on Slashdot are "off". I don't really see why there's so much hate reserved for him. Usually, when people post stupid stuff, it's just ignored and/or modded down, and that takes care of it.