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)."
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
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.
Say what you will, this is a good thing. It'll expand the reach of ODF, which is an excellent format.
Whether or not MS will keep their mitts off it remains to be seen. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now. Suicidal, I know.
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
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
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 may be selling it like pancakes, but I have also seen an upsurge in dissatisfaction.
1) Why do I have to learn a new interface?
2) Why is user X not able to open my files. Why can't we open our shared files?
3) Why is our file corrupted.
This issue has become so great that department managers have been asking me if we can go to OpenOffice.
Current plan is to minimize purchases of systems with Office 2007 and switch to OO next year, after the new version with file sharing comes out.
He who said 1,000,000 monkeys on 1,000,000 typewriters would eventually type the great novel, never saw an AOL chat room
Office 2008 for Mac may have the version 13 identifier.
http://www.mhall119.com
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*
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.
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!"
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
I agree! I can't count the number of times I've been writing a letter to family and needed the wife to put in a few words. With the new Sharepoint integration its been a snap for us to collaborate on docs together (like the grocery list). All it took was an extra server, and new licensing seats. ~
I'm more scared of them supporting ODF than I am of OOXML. How do we know they aren't going to try to do what they successfully did to Netscape. They could easily add a bunch of their own stuff into ODF so that nothing but Office would be able to read the ODF files Office puts out.
If however they are really trying to comply with ODF then hats off to MS for being serious about embracing standards.
I'm glad to hear Microsoft's embracing Python.
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.
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!
I'm not so sure. They can only lose share to quite capable (and free) alternatives. Its not the empty marketplace it was 5 years ago.
If Microsoft's options are:
Plan A) Lose market share and goodwill by making things as awkward as possible, making a hash of the implementation or making their products look poor.
Plan B) Lose less market share by having a crack at making the ODF implementation they can one top of the base of their current line.
Its probably a good bet that someone not interested in playing law suit marketing can see the benefit of having the best, most extended (with proprietary extensions) ODF format they can.
Slashdot sucks more and more every day.
1) You can turn it off, you know.
2) What files can Office 2007 not open?
3) File corruption? Can you point me to some reference that backs that up? I'm not saying it's not possible, just that I haven't heard about it being any better or worse than 2003 in that regard, except that 2007 has better recovery options. In my experience, Word files sometimes get borked when edited over an extremely slow network connection or VPN link, but the few times that's happened to me I've been able to recover from it.
This issue has become so great that department managers have been asking me if we can go to OpenOffice.
Ah, so that's why your post is +4 and I was modded down "troll". I'll have to remember in the future not to try to disturb the reality distorsion field. Microsoft is selling billions worth of Office licenses? Nah, they're dying.
The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
But then, look at IE. It took some serious competition, in the form of Firefox, but IE finally did shape up and start adding features (tabs) and reasonable standards compliance.
All we really need, then, is an ACID test for ODF, in which we can show that OpenOffice, KOffice, Google Docs, and even isolated projects like AbiWord and Gnumeric do better than Office, thus shaming Microsoft into doing it right. That assumes they don't get it right the first time, although that does seem unlikely.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
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
You missed the ~ at the end of the sentence. In case you haven't seen the sigs and small discussions about it, the tilde (~) has been repurposed to indicate sarcasm.
There. Fixed that for you.
-Docvert converts MSWord to OpenDocument, clean HTML
I've never once not been able to open my files with O2K7/8 or have had any problem sharing files.
Not a single corrupted file in many hours of use. The recovery system works fine in the event of a power outage or reboot without saving. I don't know where you're getting your data, but given my experience I'd say one of us is in the minority here. Given some of the other responses to your post I'm thinking it's you.
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.
tell me please, exactly how does one turn off the ribbon in Office 2007? the ONLY way i've found to return to the STANDARD, USABLE menu system used by almost every other GUI application in existence is to buy an add-in for office.
What is...?
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
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"?
It also is part of why I tend to ignore stuff like this. That page has fifteen different marks which could be used to indicate sarcasm. It's a bit early to pick one.
I'm usually competent at detecting sarcasm from context. The trick is to actually make it exaggerated enough that it can't be anything but sarcasm. This becomes a problem when a zealot might make the same statement seriously -- it is plausible that someone would have a spare Windows Server license to use for something like this, or that they would use their company's work servers to collaborate with their wife.
Not smart, but plausible.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
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.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
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.
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.