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)."
- 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.
No:- Loading an ODF spreadsheet will crash Office.
- Loading an ODF text will crash Office.
- Loading an ODF presentation will crash Office.
- Loading an ODF import and export will crash Office.
- etc.
That way, they can share the code between the different apps. That's also why they can release ODF before OOXMLThat said, I'll feed the troll anyway.
Having trouble reading that ODF? Why not download the real deal, Open Office?
Because OpenOffice is a slow, buggy piece of shit. I know--I've built it using native code, I've run it through a profiler to try to see where snags are so maybe I could write patches--nope. The speed and responsiveness problems are endemic; they're too widespread to actually fix.
(I wonder if twitter even knows what a profiler is.)
That does not work well for you? Works great for me, try a nice GNU/Linux distribution.
OpenOffice works worse on Linux! At least recommend a tool that doesn't suck, like KOffice. And for fuck's sake, take Stallman's cock out of your mouth--it's Linux, not GNU/Linux.
.DOC format. Any "slights" against ODF will elicit the following reaction from your average user:
Very, very few people will switch to Linux over some Microsoft action designed to piss off the nerds. Face it: most people don't give a fuck about ODF! They want a document format that everyone can read, and sorry, but ODF isn't it because ODF isn't compatible with Office 2003, Office 2000, or, basically, anything before Office 2007 (and that not even yet). Blah blah install converters, I don't give a damn. It doesn't work out of the box, so no Joe Average user is going to install it. We have a de facto standard. It's the
"Who are you and why do you smell like you haven't bathed in a week?"
Would I like an open standard? Sure, it'd be nice to have, but guess what? When you are the big fish in the small pool, you get to make most of the rules. Microsoft's the big fish. What they push is what gets used.
With vendors jumping on the GNU/Linux bandwagon, the non free software game is almost over.
Yeah, that 95% market ownership is totally fucked.
Free software is in everyone's best interest.
Free software is not in everyone's best interest. I can think of numerous groups who'd say that free software is diametrically opposed to their best interest. The one that comes to mind first is game developers (and, by extension, gamers). F/OSS methodologies don't translate well to game development. Look at FreeCiv--it's been around since 1996 and it doesn't even surpass Civilization II in quality! And while there are some interesting F/OSS shooters like Warsow, keep in mind that the majority of the good ones rely on code written in a closed-source environment by iD Software. The "biggest name" in independent engine development that I know of is the Sauerbraten/Cube 2 team, and while I love what they're doing, it does not, and likely never will, step up to the actual gaming industry.
This is also very, very bad for gamers. The only games with any sort of real profit in this utopic ALL SOFTWARE IS FREE SOFTWARE world are MMOs with servers--and, hell, it'd be hypocritical for the servers not to be open-source as well, so fuck, there goes that profit. Episodic gaming/content generation? It'd be hypocritical for content to be locked up and code not to be, so there goes that profit, too! Advertising? Somebody will just hack the code to hide them, so there goes that, too! And without profits, how are you going to convince anyone to fund quality games? Donations? Yeah, right--show me one free software project where its developers actually get a livable wage off donations. Webcomic authors get more in donations-per-staffer than do the majority of valuable F/OSS software projects.
And I'm not just fucking talking about EA or any of the giants, I'm talking about small-scale companies too. The innovative stuff that comes out of smaller studios that can afford to take risks because they will be paid back if it's good would cease. The Spiderweb Softwares and Activisions of the world alike would die, and
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Not useful.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,